>read the Frankfurt School works >read nothing that looks

Why does /pol/ think that the Frankfurt School spawned "Cultural Marxism" despite being one of the most elitist leftist movements?

>>8748310

My guess is that they noticed it's mostly a bunch of Jews who analyzed (western) culture moreso than economics... And as such the conspiratorial wheel got turning.

>>8748318
>>8748310
Likely because they (Adorno in particular) championed jewish "degenerate art".

>>8748307
Because they're Jewish and Communists so people who don't read them can project their conspiracy fantasies

File: 1423633377724.jpg (15KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 300x300px

>>8748330
>Likely because they (Adorno in particular) championed jewish "degenerate art".

Couldn't be more wrong. Try actually reading someone before making claims about what he said

>>8748338
I have only read his writings on music (I am a musician) and he specifically champions the emancipation of tonality and the serialists as opposed to "reactionaries" such as Stravinsky or Hindemith.

>>8748338

Try reading him yourself. Or just listen to him. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-njxKF8CkoU

>>8748354
>>8748344
Just because he wasn't for a fedora tipping regurgigation of classical music doesn't mean he was for "degeneration of art" as /pol/tards use the term, he was an elitist if there ever was one

>>8748363

Yes, it does. Try listening to that shit. It's just intellectual wankery, and literally wallowing in ugliness. He hates beauty.

>>8748368
Which is irrelevant to the proposition when he was shitting on American pop-music which has a huge Jewish leadership

The whole thing is a hangover of Kulturbolschewismus, a rejection of any artform that demands the viewer question their relation to it.

>>8748376
I didn't say he had anything to do with that either, I just explained wherein the idea of Adorno and the Frankfurt school as dangerous subversives come from, that is, the less intelligent subsets of /pol/ confusing "degenerate" art with commercial art.

>>8748384
Absolutely sure, but then works like Ulysses are in this dangerous subversion which is why I hastened to clarify

>>8748307
>>8748310
This doesn't specifically relate to the Frankfurt School but a lot of what /pol/ thinks about leftists comes from this guy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gnpCqsXE8g

>>8748390
Some would absolutely agree with that, e.g. Neo-Romantics like Hamsun.

Adorno isn't bad. Habermas is the one bad apple in the Frankfurt school and the closest to the stereotypes on the Frankfurt school.

But overall the Frankfurt school is peanuts compared to Gramsci, Foucault and their followers. Those are true degenerates, not in the /pol/ sense but in the strict meaning of the word. It started as Marxism and it ended as some fetid purulence.

>>8748397

But this is just one dude... Obviously with a personal vendetta against a system that he felt didn't deliver for him.

>>8748442
Foucault was a degenerate in every sense. Also it doesn't help that he's responsible for that muh bodies garbage Ta-Nehisi Coates and all those other fags spew.

>>8748310
Many of the 68ers were originally inspired by Marxist intellectuals like the Frankfurt School. Many of those 68ers of once are now in positions of power (think of Barroso, Joschka Fischer, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, etc), even though most of them discarded any open affiliation with marxism. That does not imply that the Frankfurt School is behind "cultural marxism" but that there is a line of continuity. Add some conspiracy ideas and you're good to go.

File: img_6358a.jpg (31KB, 336x435px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 336x435px

this triggers the /pol/

>>8748528
UNNNGHHH THICKER

>itt: pseuds who think they're rebellious patricians because they read their undergrad crit theory assignment list

Try "The Authoritarian Personality". Look into who it was written by and funded by.

>>8748520
>That does not imply that the Frankfurt School is behind "cultural marxism" but that there is a line of continuity.

Is it presumed the reasons for 'cultural marxism' is profit, first and foremost? Is it thought, if there is some active push at all, that it is not purely naturally unconscious, would the main motivation be profit, and/or do you think the potential pushers, truly believe that it is the objectively right thing to do, for some ever less distant hand holding world vision of the future?

>>8748397
A surprising part of /pol/'s cosmology is lifted wholesale from 1950s red scare propaganda and John Birch Society material.

>>8748498
>>8748442
Foucault was a Libertarian Friedrich Hayek fanboi who went around campuses triggering communists (PCF=OG SJWs). Focault was the French Milo Yiannopoulus. I think the alt right could learn a lot from Foucault.

>>8748310
'Kultur Bolshevismus' was already a catchphrase in Nazi propaganda back in the 1930s. It refers to the exact same narrative: Jews pushing degeneracy, promiscuity, homosexuality, modern art, subverting the fatherland from within, etc., etc.

>>8748397
>>8748465
Going to America and selling paranoid cold war fantasies to gullible burgers is a long and storied Russian tradition.

https://pando.com/2015/05/17/neocons-2-0-the-problem-with-peter-pomerantsev/

>>8750461
That's an interesting theory.

>>8750413
This too. Not a Foucault guy by any stretch but I thought it was interesting that he wanted to work at the College de France, to be at the centre of power in order to prevent minorities from minoritizing themselves. Seems things didn't quite work out that way in the idpol era. Right Foucault would be a good look but I can't quite get my head around how it would work (it is admittedly a second-rate head). It's hard to criticize power Foucault-style when you already are power, no?

I don't know where I'm at on Foucault but his CdF lectures are pretty good reading. 'Truth is given to the subject at a price that brings the subject's own being into question' always stuck with me.

>>8750340
I don't know exactly, but in Dialectic of Enlightenment A&H work pretty hard to take the bloom off of the Odyssey, and I think this is why he accrues the hate. Modernism fucks with the sexy mysticism of mythology and gnostic seeking.

What I think gets overlooked is that Adorno was hated in his own time by the counterculture. Things like his classes getting disrupted by naked hippie women draping flowers over his head - he dies a few days later, IIRC - is a pretty crazy image. The masses turning on the elites and the elites condemning the narrowmindedness of the masses is always a page-turner. I think it's why all the signals got tangled in the 80s/90s with the final collapse of any meaningful distinction between high and low culture. Or whenever it was that that happened.

WARNING: this thread is full of ZOG lackeys. Repeat after me!
ZOG CAN SUCK MY PRETTY WOG (Weenie of Giants)

Goddamn those ZOG lackeys, they're everywhere! How did they find us? They must have heard our critique of modernity!

>ducks under desk in combat crouch, forms pistol shape with hand

Cover me, I'm going in!

>pew pew

>>8748442
yeah, fuck foucault. but i don't understand the hate for Gramsci?

>>8750590
ZOG CAN SUCK MY PRETTY WOG

>>8750591
fuck off retard

>>8748676

hey man, they may have only read the assignment list, but you've only read the wikipedia page lol

>>8748380
>allowing the perceptions of the viewer to taint the surface of the art
Gross, if that's the cost I'll take my classical art ty

>>8750596
ZOG CAN SUCK MY PRETTY WOG
>>8750598
ZOG CAN SUCK MY PRETTY WOG
>>8750629
ZOG CAN SUCK MY PRETTY WOG

>>8750550
>Right Foucault would be a good look but I can't quite get my head around how it would work (it is admittedly a second-rate head). It's hard to criticize power Foucault-style when you already are power, no?

here's Zizek on the topic:

>This tension was already clearly discernible in the work of Michel Foucault, who serves as the point of reference for most of these authors: his notion of Power is presented as a neutral tool that describes the way the entire field of existing power structures and resistances to them functions. Foucault liked to present himself as a detached positivist, laying bare the common mechanisms that underlie the activity of passion ately opposed political agents; on the other hand, one cannot avoid the impression that Foucault is somehow passionately on the side of the 'oppressed', of those who are caught in the machinery of 'discipline and punishment', and aims to give them the chance to utter, to enable them to start to 'speak for themselves'. . . .

this i think is too generous. Foucault, i think, is totally enamored with power. he slips in his rhetorical flourishes in favor of "the oppressed" so that he can slip by unnoticed into the lefty pantheon. but he is fascist through and through imo, loves to feel his body penetrated by the iron laws of power, yearns for o'brien's boot to crush his latexed face.

File: Pegida-Dresden-6.2.1667b.jpg (348KB, 1200x489px) Image search: [Google]

348KB, 1200x489px

>>8748307
Marxism vs Cultural Marxism

>>8750635
jesus murphy you need this one bad don't you

>>8750645
Good post anon, thanks. Foucault fascist through and through? I wouldn't have thought that, but I haven't read him all that seriously either.

It is interesting, though, that the more philosophy preoccupies itself with the oppressed and the victims of the system the more the alt-right is likely to grow (unless this is the peak, but I doubt that). A Right Foucault would I guess direct them towards something genuinely creative or emancipatory, perhaps more like Nietzsche, than being concerned with discipline and punishment, which only ever makes the punishers look bad.

Foucault's a complicated guy tho. I wonder what he would have thought of the world today.

File: 1478035323115.jpg (25KB, 244x300px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 244x300px

>>8750701
>Foucault's a complicated guy tho. I wonder what he would have thought of the world today.

>>8750701
>the more philosophy preoccupies itself with the oppressed and the victims of the system the more the alt-right is likely to grow

What did you mean by this?

>>8750701
its from The Ticklish Subject, a few pages into the second part, if ur interested.

I've only read Discipline & Punish and History of Sexuality, as well as bits and pieces of his interviews and some earlier works and—I don't know, overall he just seems to spend a lot of time admiring the efficiency of the deployment and auto-reproduction of power relations and knowledge/power and all that. it's all glittering mechanism to him, and it often seems a thing of beauty. that could be my own projections, though; I'm study marxism rn and its sometimes hard to remember not to get caught up in the subtleties of capital; i imagine MD's who study cancer feel the same way sometimes.

>>8750712
One of the most interesting things, is what people place value in/on, and of what quantity and quality is it that they place

>>8750708
Yeah, maybe. Like one of those Gavin McInnes things taken to the nth degree, where people become such hipsters that they just go all the way over, find Jesus, and began unironically (or is it?!?!?!) appearing on Fox, where they are treated in this weird way. I could almost see Zizek on CNN in a similar role, but whatever.

>>8750709
I mean, it's not exactly rocket science. Look at the election. The left imploded under its own collective desire to be on the right side of history. The whole time the other side was chanting, like a mantra, No Enemies to the Right. Left progressivism became hegemonic and the blowback to that led to Trump. Of course, very few saw this coming until election day.

When everyone is a victim, no one is. This is why guys like Z or Badiou don't go for idpol stuff, but try to keep the conversation about capitalism or metaphysics: they don't want the oppressed to oppress themselves, or allow people to pretend that any of that impacts the real story, which is global markets and so on. Look at how Z will talk about Apple using transgendered bathrooms as a smokescreen for doing about Foxconn and so on. Stuff like this.

I actually liked a lot of redpill stuff, but Richard Spencer/Hail Trump! is pretty fucking disturbing.

>>8750734

hue

>>8750712
I read D&P, Order of Things, and the Hermeneutics of the Subject, plus other stuff from the lectures here and there and the reader. F isn't one of my favourite authors, but he's definitely a big deal. Like Z also and have read many of his works too, but not TS yet. Now this thread makes me feel like going back and reading him again.

I think you're right, that he sees power as this glittering mechanism, a thing of beauty. I think Deleuze and Baudrillard both felt this way about capital, and in the end they were so bewitched by this awful thing that they were thinking about that they wound up finding a kind of unholy beauty in it. Nick Land also, of course, maybe the premier case of this kind of stuff. I don't think it's your own projections at all, I feel much the same way sometimes.

The subtleties of capital/cancer analogy is pretty fucking on-point, I think I'm going to share that one.

>>8750741
>Yeah, maybe. Like one of those Gavin McInnes things taken to the nth degree, where people become such hipsters that they just go all the way over, find Jesus, and began unironically (or is it?!?!?!) appearing on Fox, where they are treated in this weird way.

Sam Hyde Syndrome

REPEAT AFTER ME: ZOG GIT YE GONE

>>8748442
>Habermas is the one bad apple in the Frankfurt school and the closest to the stereotypes on the Frankfurt school.

That is the most meaninglessness nothing sentence I've read in awhile.

>>8750741
>Apple using transgendered bathrooms as a smokescreen for doing about Foxconn
this is why the secular humanist have created the best society: they created a morality which is cheap, that people like and that people believe they have created it

File: greek assemblywomen.jpg (375KB, 867x1000px) Image search: [Google]

375KB, 867x1000px

swallow this

>>8750741
>Richard Spencer/Hail Trump! is pretty fucking disturbing
Really though what's this dude's problem? It's not even memes anymore.

>>8750761

I've always felt that way about deleuze and guattari as well, but with 2 caveats

1. i think the obsessional stuff is mostly bad air from guattari

2. i think at bottom they both maintain a pretty healthy commitment to real change and social action—this is to be opposed to foucault's sort of "neutral" appraisals of power and his pseudo-lefty lip service.

glad to know I'm not alone in this wildly unpopular opinion—this would be literal heresy in my department. nonetheless I'm coming at this problem in my work rn, but mostly tackling it in code, transplanting my critique of F onto the hapless figure of Latour, whose "ontology" of the social is basically similar to F's understanding of how power works, but who hasn't got a fucking clue haha.

>>8750761
>>8751143

and btw i hope you do write about this stuff, be "bewitched" is absolutely the bon mot. bewitching, charming, enchanting, etc. this needs to be the paradigm for a critique of these people, i think. i think also that its an important critique to make, because, while the left in this country has never really been strong since the depression, they had a chance to be in the 70s, and the import of Foucault et. al. really enabled the student movement to become the banal identity politician gender studies profs we all know and hate, allowing them retreat from any semblance of the political in favor a purely superstructural model of action. the linguistic turn is pure ideology, imo. but at the same time, I'm in an english dept., so idk how to get out of it at the moment.

>>8751155
because**

>>8751143
Yeah, D&G are special. AO and ATP blew the doors off what was becoming a pretty stale and formulaic brand of pomo despair for me that I acquired after digesting Baudrillard. I like Z because I do think the whole enchilada is about desire, and being a total fucking recluse I am averse to going outside and getting involved with mass politics. It's definitely a compromised way to look at things, so I mainly just stare at CNN and chain-smoke cigarettes and think about this stuff.

I'm saddened to think that criticism is heresy in your department. Haven't read much Latour, but I understand that he is a guy in these conversations, and I intend to get to him one of these days.

>>8751155
D&G are legit revolutionaries. ATP in particular is a book like no other. The only criticism of D's thought that I might be inclined to take seriously comes from the OOO/spec realism guys but this looks to me like more despair, although I am pretty much used to despair at this point and it does make for some excellent reading. I think it's also still too early for me to decide where I'm at on Harman and those guys too. They're building on Heidegger, who I'm pretty familiar with, but Deleuze is I think still the way forward.

So yeah, I don't know how to get out of this either. Retreat from the political is indeed the situation, on both sides. And with Trump anything could happen. Part of me wants to try to assuage my more hysterical progressive friends, try a kind of cautious optimism; but I can't possibly expect him to live up to the impossible ideas he campaigned on, which only interested me b/c they seemed so much to be the voice of the zeitgeist: less pro-right than anti-left. It may simply in the end amount to as much reactivity and ressentiment as the guys they were opposed to.

It really is a sea change, I think. Last time I checked Foucault was the most-cited figure in the humanities because he is such a powerful critic of The Establishment. Trump in the White House suggests to me both a confirmation and a disappearance of that same establishment. Clearly he *is* Establishment (and the term is already almost completely useless, not because it's not there, but because it is available to both sides), and yet he is also a populist anti-Establishment guy. So we will form ourselves a new Establishment, For Real This Time, and...well, who knows.

I do feel that we need to get past the old Marxist paradigm, but there hasn't been anything to replace it. Lacan is a good look, and I like him. Heidegger maybe not so much; we're not going to escape technology, nor is there any need to.

Just my hot take. Sorry I didn't get back to you earlier, I was falling asleep last night. Take care anon, and thanks for the conversation.

>>8748334

Well... then I guess they're right. JEWISH COMMUNISTS

>>8750962
>this is why the secular humanist have created the best society: they created a morality which is cheap, that people like and that people believe they have created it

I agree with this 100% also, for what it's worth. My own feeling is that this is the endgame of any tacitly or explicitly neoliberal mode of thinking. And it leads to progressivism, because (as Z says, etc...someday I will not need to namedrop these thoughts) capital is always going to be on the sides of progress in order to follow the markets. Put a promethean/homo faber cherry on top to charm the Randian Objectivists and you're good to go.

Better fantasy novel: Lord of the Rings, or Atlas Shrugged? At least LotR had the good grace not to include a 70 page manifesto in it, which was the least interesting part of that book. I actually like Rand's prose and think she had more going on than most pro-capitalist types, because she actually tried to attach a moral dimension to capital, the sublimation or hiding of which is actually what is required for capital to work: This Is Not A Chicken McNugget. Despite being the poster child it's harder to run Z's ideology-shredding computer program on Rand than, say, your standard go-to action blockbuster. Kind of interesting.

I read a biography of her, and she was, no surprise, a gigantically complicated, fucked-up, frequently unhappy, and pretty original person. Objectivism seems basically like pure nostalgia to me now but it's still fun to think about. And I suppose it must have been going on while Adorno et al were writing, I guess. Good thing none of those guys ever helmed the Federal Reserve or anything with an unironic perception of her in mind. That would have been really crazy.

>>8751787
You mean like Marx?

>>8751817
It might also be the case that what separates serious literature from shit-lit is the presence, or absence, of a manifesto. That's all deconstruction is, really: the detection and dismantling of the paradoxes inherent to all manifestos. Really good literature either sublimates this to a degree we don't even see, or is written by someone self-possessed enough not to need to project this, consciously or otherwise, onto a mass audience. This is to some degree what Adorno was thinking about, more with Foucault, and def with Z. But it's only really making sense to me now.

I fucking love /lit/ sometimes. Where else can you even talk about this stuff? (Besides the bathroom stall at Starbucks where I am now texting this from a stolen IPhone, wearing a sandwich board and covered with flies, of course.)

>>8751779

I take issue with Harman in that he has this tendency to look for more objects where his system does not require any. Compare his book Tool-Being to his essay on vicarious causation: on the one hand you have the Heideggerian dialectics of presence/absence perfectly self contained within the heart of the object, thus making every object an "agent" of change in a certain sense, then, years later, on the other hand you have real and sensuous objects split off from each other and vaguely united by a concept of allure which basically puts linguistic turn back on the table in the form of "aesthetics as first philosophy." he goes from heraclitus to zeno, basically; motion becomes an ("alluring") illusion of the play and transfer of sensuous qualities between and among static objects, whereas before it was constitutive of the object as such. and i am not totally sure why he felt the need to do so. i suppose he realized that the earlier position was leading him on the fast track to something like a "subjectivity of the object" which he rightly could have wanted to avoid, but now it's like, either we need a transcendental subject to observe all change or change is this thing that can only be written about. i don't know.

>>8750995
Hes triggering cucks like you

>>8748307
No idea if there's any truth to this, but from previous discussions about /pol/ I remember anon saying The One-Dimensional Man was an important influence on leftist identity politics of the kind /pol/ complains about (while hypocritically pushing its own infinitely worse identity politics).

Also a lot of /pol/ talk can be linked to Gramsci's war of positioning. Of course, he wasn't actually a Frankfurt School member, but nobody ever accused /pol/ of knowing what it was talking about.

>>8752002
Sounds about right to me, and that is very interestingly phrased, so thanks for sharing that. Basically it's a kind of flight from the object itself, which is what seems to be Meillassoux's aim. Brassier likes nihilism as a speculative opportunity, this sense of thought being completely independent of correlation to reality, but I'm not really sure if this leads to anything else but Landian madness. Or just becoming completely numb. Maybe that's it. But I find that cosmic horror and antinatalism and the other literary sources spec-real guys work don't work for me, for some reason.

Not that it is by any means the case that philosophy and politics, or even philosophy and action, need have anything to do with each other. These may all be the death-rattles of '68ish stuff, the last gasps of heroic socialism. Doesn't exactly make the sun come out. And I can't help but have this feeling that it is a very French thing to do, to reject that which one desires in this fabulously seductive fashion.

Part of this also is this feeling that we are heading for some kind of common ground again uninterrupted by the presence of the object. I have found Rene Girard's theory of mimetic desire to be really attractive these days. That desire is this shared thing comes from Lacan and in a sort of reversed way in Baudrillard, but both of them are struggling with this notion of a Real that my own intuitions suggest should really just be laid to rest. I think it's all mimetic, that the real is the shared virtuality, and the unshared - the excruciatingly deconstructive and so on - belongs to an epoch that may already be passing.

I'm not in academia, though. I maybe starting to resemble Oswald Spengler, who I love reading, and going in a kind of more mystical direction vis-a-vis all of this. Part of the attraction to philosophy for me is this continual narrative of the Subject who keeps getting sucked into these conceptual paradigms in which there appears to be no escape, and then something happens in history from out of left field that nobody could have predicted and something entirely new begins.

>>8752079
Marcuse actually is responsible for that whole New Left idpol thing. That's one of the real Frankfurt School things that jumped out at me, but the rest not so much.

>>8752046
i am a cuck
i am triggered
it is spencer's hair which does this
it is shiny and sleek and masculine, like a bullet
or a locomotive engine
if my head looked like a bullet
perhaps i would not feel so lonely
i would be like the other bullet-headed ones
and we would have such good times together

File: 1452005635163.png (819KB, 500x557px) Image search: [Google]

819KB, 500x557px

>>8748307
It seems they noticed scholars of the Frankfurt School had broad, deep influence on academic culture in the 50s and 60s, particularly on the development of sociology. That part is undeniably true, though it can certainly be contested what exactly the pith of FS thought is.

Then they noticed the scholars over whom FS theorists and thinkers exerted profound influence were advocates of the following:
>moral relativism
>the deconstruction of gender roles and traditional nuclear family structure
>the deconstruction of white identity and parallel encouragement of non-white ethnic solidarity and anti-white identity hostility
>the deconstruction of the scientific method and a concerted, sustained attack on academic freedom
>horde immigration from the third world and third worldist positions in all socioeconomic fora
>a concerted, sustained attack on free speech, with particular emphasis on non-debatable facts that undermine leftist academic consensus

The second part is also undeniably true; it is the basic essence of all higher education in the West, and in the past few decades the basis of public policy as well. What is at issue, and is also irrelevant, is whether there is a causal relationship between the first part and the second. I for my part don't give a shit, and would wager that the fashionable nonsense of modernity is actually the necessary outgrowth of Protestantism. There is little in modern leftist thought that wasn't foreshadowed, for instance, in the Flushing Remonstrance nearly 400 years prior. I honestly doubt Jews were the cause of any of this. They're just the most obvious beneficiaries. And that's the greater concern, and one from which the cultural Marxism debate distracts: why they hold such broad power and influence in this society, and why that fact cannot be seriously discussed; why the only thing held in common by most human cultures in most human history is anti-Semitism, and whether there's a link between that and Jewish behavior itself.

If you simply take any modern debate regarding outcome disparity between blacks and whites and replace those terms with Christians and Jews, and you have exactly the same outcome disparity. Yet only in the former is it considered the result of hate and discrimination and exploitation, while in the latter, to even consider that very fair question, it is considered itself criminal.

That's why /pol/ exercises every chance it gets to take a swing at the Tribe, even when it's obvious nonsense. Because their larger concerns are valid, yet they go wholly ignored.

File: 1477316253614.jpg (3KB, 120x117px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 120x117px

>>8750352

The whole idea of a "red scare" is pretty stupid when you consider that it was entirely justified, as the Venona Papers proved. McCarthy was generally right on the money.

File: W I L L E Z U R M A C H T.jpg (89KB, 844x960px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 844x960px

/pol/ isn't as wrong as many think when it comes to the Frankfurt School, but where they're right is pure coincidence.

Most of what they rail against is Gramscianism, but I suppose 'The Frankfurt School' and 'Cultural Marxism' suggests movements/multiple people, which perhaps lends itself more to the conspiracy-minded - as opposed to one Italian guy who wrote a load of shit in a prison cell.

More generally, it's moral/cultural relativism at large that seems to grind their gears. They still haven't realized that they can use this to their advantage though, which they would if they'd bother to read the likes of Nietzsche - as opposed to the many 20th century thinkers, generally French and/or left-leaning, who've been riding on his coattails.

>>8752272
>yet only in the former is it considered the result of hate and discrimination and exploitation, while in the latter, to even consider that very fair question, it is considered itself criminal

>that's why /pol/ exercises every chance it gets to take a swing at the Tribe, even when it's obvious nonsense. because their larger concerns are valid, yet they go wholly ignored

Holy shit anon, that's some good stuff. I feel the same way in two senses. On the one hand, that trying to write about idpol and valorizing the oppressed tends to only perpetuate the same kind of thinking, because one can't talk about the position of the other and the marginalized without oneself presuming to know/not know about where these lines are. So trying to be on "the right side of history" (and this is dumb) just leads to a cycle of self-recrimination made worse for all its historical deafness. But you already know this, so I won't continue. Just that I found that stuff exhausting and it's why I started to look at things from the other perspective, because I felt it all starting to become familiar and recursive and even cynical.

Now you have this other side as well, the alt-right, which as you say, have these valid concerns, and which are going to get taken over by demagogues like Spencer - and isn't that going to bite them in the ass in the long run, if that hasn't started already? Nick Land was already saying stuff about this, how NRx (is that even a thing anymore?) is different from the alt-right, which is now in the public consciousness, but how long before it recurves back into a familiar sequence of talking points, strawmen, scapegoats and so on? Are they not going to get fucked by their least interesting media figures? Is that what they want?

I feel that to some degree it's because this is what people expect from politics, feel that that's how it's supposed to be done (who knows, maybe it is): that it's all a giant football game that happens every four years, but in which both sides play by completely different rules. It's a shitty analogy but w/evs. I always thought politics was a clusterfuck but only really began following events last year, and now I'm tempted to just back away slowly once again and go back to whatever the fuck I was doing before. But there really is no escape from it.

Anyways...good fucking stuff anon. If you have a book or a YouTube lecture or something to recommend I'd be very interested. I am sincerely trying not to be a reactive fuckwit anymore and just be on one side or the other, lamenting x or y. But it's fucking hard when one is basically raised on deconstruction (and my eyes melt out of my head when I try to read Kant).

>>8748310
Everyone who replied to this post is wrong. /pol/ has that opinion because everyone around them parrots it, simple as that. You're overestimating the vast majority of them if you think they actually read or have knowledge of any of the things you guys are talking about here.

>>8748368
I think it's unfair to paint someone as a champion of the degeneracy of art just because they're into experimental music. Okay, I get it, you're not into Stravisnky, that's fine, but come on now.

>>8752323
Unrelated to your post, I was curious about the "1883" on your picture, and decided to check his Wikipedia page.

>By 1882 Nietzsche was taking huge doses of opium but was still having trouble sleeping.
>In 1883, while staying in Nice, he was writing out his own prescriptions for the sedative chloral hydrate, signing them "Dr. Nietzsche".

The absolute madman.

File: Slavoj.png (538KB, 619x338px) Image search: [Google]

538KB, 619x338px

>>8752393

It must have been so easy to get free drugs back then.

>Tfw you'll never do cocaine with Freud

Might as well post this here, for some reason: why the Chinese like Trump. This is ripped straight off of Nick Land's blog, so if he winds up reading this: Hi Nick, we all think you're the cat's pyjamas, and thanks for all the wormholes.

https://andrewbatson.com/2016/11/21/zhao-lingmin-on-the-roots-of-chinese-elite-support-for-trump/

>>8751779
>OOO/spec realism
with is OO depressing?

File: 1478677544640.gif (361KB, 500x282px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 500x282px

>>8752430

It would be much more interesting to see why the Japanese love Trump so much.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eMEQmDffYM

>>8752431
Do you mean, why do I find it depressing? Because I guess I still like Heidegger, that's all, even if he seems quaint and old-fashioned (and there is that whole Nazi thing going on as well, but does anyone really want to get into this? I don't.)

Heidegger's worldview is I think pretty much like Tolkien's, I think, and I can't deny that as much as I like philosophy, I would hate to someday have to choose between continental philosophy and Middle-Earth. The more philosophy I read, the shittier life looks; but even worse than this would be the feeling of reading Tolkien and have him put a cup of tea in my hand and say, buck up there kid, it's not really so bad as you think. Even though I would be by that point an Orcish fuckface with a boatload of reasons and not a cool and welcome guest at Rivendell.

Just sentimental, I guess.

>>8752446
Thanks for posting. Will listen to this. This is another one of these things about the modern left, and Z has been saying this for years: the Anglo-American/Western left is not the universal left. It's worth considering how the rest of the world feels about this shit before we jump to conclusions and make up our minds and Hit The Streets and so on. Not that I could be induced out from under the rock I live beneath with a backhoe. But w/evs.

Fake, but mandatory. You've probably seen this already.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbM6WbUw7Bs

>>8752272
I've only read Adorno in depth. And ira not like that by any means. Seriously, did you even bother to skim the Wikipedia page? Adorno actually railed against cultural relativism as well as against the dehumanisation of everyday existence under capitalism. In minima moralia, he warns us not to romanticise non western cultures as they all exist within the capitalist system.

>>8748520
Adorno called cops on hippies

>>8750995
Imagine being so turbomemed you think that dork Richard Spencer is the one true fuehrer, a superior being worthy of devotion. i bet a fair percentage of /pol/acks would feel honoured to lick whatever overpriced footwear he happens to be wearing

>>8753180
Everybody knows Spencer is an irrelevant clown.

Everybody knows the alt right is led by the triumvirate (Bronze Age Pervert, Menaquinone4, Kantbot2000)

File: Wew kid.jpg (4KB, 200x192px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 200x192px

>>8753201

>Forgetting the emperor

>>8753209
>a libertarian is the leader of the alt-right

If he's not NatSoc then no

File: Sammy.png (180KB, 500x599px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 500x599px

>>8753215

>Sam Hyde
>Libertarian

You need to follow his Facebook, my man. That's where the mask really slips.

>>8753235
You realize Hyde is dating a transexual Jew right? the guy is a comedian.

>>8753201
Holy shit some of this stuff is insane. I'm only seeing some of these feeds for the first time. Kantbot had an AMA here yesterday and I had no idea what was happening. Apparently an NRx-er? I read some of the blog. Pretty interesting.

I used to think that the people who had the answers and made the most sense worked in university departments. Apparently they're all on Twitter. Things you learn.

>>8753209
They're going to have to take his phone away at some point. There's no way we will get an entire presidential term live-tweeted like this...will we?

>>8748330
Adorno was the least Jewish Frankfurter

>>8753215
I think Sam Hyde is not a real person but a simulacrum like one of those evil android comedians in Philip K Dick novels. 'Sam Hyde' happens to be the name of a trickster demon figure in New England folklore. Coincidence?

File: yeah.webm (737KB, 534x500px) Image search: [Google]

737KB, 534x500px

>>8753278

Sam Hyde is the future.

File: 1478677797346.jpg (98KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1280x720px

>>8753262
>I used to think that the people who had the answers and made the most sense worked in university departments
Hahahaha... Ah... The mistakes of youth...
>>8753209
Sam is more like an enforcer than anything else.

I still don't know who the fuck Sam Hyde is supposed to be?

>>8753393

You could use google?

>>8750995
He said he was being ironic. Dudes trying to rile people up. He's being un pc and 'punk rock'. Why base your opinion of a whole movement in a few clips taken out of context? I think the Alf right and spencer are quite reasonable and have great ideas but the mainstream media is really biased and won't give them a fair chance.

>>8754007
Richard Spencer is fat and therefore morally deficient and should be disregarded.

File: wrong-295503_960_720.png (60KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 720x720px

>>8748368
Serialism is fine you retard, and Schoenberg is one of the greatest composers of the 20th century. Serialism has essentially run it's course but it's important that it was done.

>It's just intellectual wankery,
You sound like the degenerate now.

>and literally wallowing in ugliness. He hates beauty.
wrong

>>8748442
>Those are true degenerates, not in the /pol/ sense but in the strict meaning of the word.
The strictest meaning of the word is Mad Max. Moral "degeneracy" essentially means "things I don't like", same with aesthetic or artistic "degeneracy". The only objective measure of "degeneracy" is things like corruption, the inability of the state to carry out it's ordinary functions etc.

>>8754046
I think gays/trannies and their enablers are degenerate because reproduction and family are among the core normal human functions. I think people who hate their own race are degenerate because we are programmed to ensure the survival of our genes and those of our kin.

>>8754007
This, the alt right believes in 'peaceful' ethnic cleansing, it is the leftists Soros thugs who are violent.

File: 1461431609144.png (116KB, 228x260px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 228x260px

>>8754071

>>8754046
>The only objective measure of "degeneracy" is things like corruption, the inability of the state to carry out it's ordinary functions etc.
yeah, so it is still ''things have been trained all my life to 'like, so I do not like it when people do not behave like I was told''

>>8752129
This, I actually think it would be fair to call Marcuse a "cultural Marxist". One-Dimensional Man was a huge influence on the New Left, he actively tutored leftist activists as to how to apply his theories and what they should do, his "Critique of Pure Tolerance" was basically the prototype for hate speech laws and college speech codes, he championed what Marx would have viewed as the lumpenproletariat as being the agents for his idea of emancipatory revolution, and he was even a professor at Columbia and Brandeis. This matches most of the /pol/ stereotypes.

And I like most of the Frankfurt School, Adorno, Horkheimer, Benjamin, who don't fit those /pol/ stereotypes.

>>8752272
First of all it's clear that you are unfamiliar with the Frankfurt school.

>If you simply take any modern debate regarding outcome disparity between blacks and whites and replace those terms with Christians and Jews, and you have exactly the same outcome disparity. Yet only in the former is it considered the result of hate and discrimination and exploitation, while in the latter, to even consider that very fair question, it is considered itself criminal.
This is only a valid comparison when comparing Jews in America to whites in, for example Kenya, Jamaica or somewhere else where whites exist as a small but wealthy and influential majority.

There is no double standard for most people. I'm sure you can find some examples but it's far from a widespread dogma like you claim it is.

/pol/'s concerns regarding the Jews are not valid, but in reality I think their anti-semitism is only skin deep, a mostly aesthetic affectation which they enthusiastically adopt because it's so handy to be able to do ((((this)))) when faced with opposition. Their hatred for blacks and muslims is much more palpable, and their hatred for ideological opponents is even worse.

>>8754071
This is a more reasonable interpretation even if it's based on a retarded naturalistic fallacy. "Degeneracy" here is actually a coherent thing.

>>8754477
>yeah, so it is still ''things have been trained all my life to 'like, so I do not like it when people do not behave like I was told''
I've made no value statements about the state itself, whether it's good or bad. Just that a state which is incapable of governing is as degenerate as a crippled old man. You can apply this to more than a state. To any clearly defined actor really, but you can't apply it to things like morality or aesthetics for which there is no universal standard.

>>8748330
now you have to decide if degeneracy is:
>2deep4u atonal wankery
or
>pop music corrupting our youth

>>8752300

The point of the McCarthy backlash was that ideological trials were more appropriate for the Soviets than the States.
It wasn't whether they were communists that formed the issue, it was whether communism was un-American.
Honestly I think the trials were a mistake, from the American point of view - it made it seem like American communists couldn't be assimilated into American society, which is what eventually happened.

>>8752079
>while hypocritically pushing its own infinitely worse identity politics

Honestly, any identity politics is retarded by definition, and I think holding the idea will take you to the same place every time(e.g chaos and destruction).

The idea that there is a difference in the outcome of white identity politics vs black identity politics is pure ideology.

File: quote-auschwitz-begins-wherever-someone-looks-at-a-slaughterhouse-and-thinks-they-re-only-theodor-adorno-40-1-0140.jpg (61KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 850x400px

So here's a question, anons.

It would seem to me that Adorno's modernism in a certain sense is going to be tough for what he will call (or rather, what I will call, with all that this entails) muh feels in art. Whether it's the heroic sentiments that he is going to try and take apart in the Odyssey, or his contempt for 60s counterculture, Adorno's aesthetic theory is I think to some degree intended to problematize what would otherwise be an easy 1:1 relationship between aesthetics and myth.

Now I don't really like modernism, myself. And feeling as though I could - that is, that I could be a super-aesthete and bring an Adorno-scale battery of critical guns to bear on every piece of mass art I encounter - doesn't feel so attractive either.

I'll grant you that this is a personal thing, and I welcome the obvious criticisms of this post (i.e., "muh feels" vastly and unfairly oversimplifies aesthetic experience). But for the sake of conversation, and because I am interested in this stuff, doesn't it seem true that modernist aesthetic theory disarms the frequently cruel and stupid ideological programming one finds in mass-market mythologies, advertisement, and elsewhere, which operate on both sides of the political spectrum, by splitting off signs from significations? It's hard to sincerely write a rocking stadium-sized anthem and dedicate it to Theodore Adorno, but it's not like we lack for anthems these days. Maybe a modernist turn wouldn't be such a bad idea.

I've said this elsewhere, but what I think the issue at hand in culture today is is *primitivism* - vulgarity, decadence, ressentiment, whatever. Adorno was a lot of things, but you couldn't say he was full of shit. The man legitimately "cared" about culture (I know, I know, "caring"), and while he was never really at home, perhaps, in America, he had a reason for being there that is not so hard to understand.

Modernism is not my thing, and while critical theory is fun to read, I think it really has run its course at this point. We're so primed to take a critical stance on things that we end up forgetting to just stand there in front of a painting or whatever and try to *not* think, which was I think Schopenhauer's point as well. The horror of Nazism probably never left Adorno's mind, and it would be difficult to criticize him for that. It's not like that was his fault. I would submit that today we are far too afraid of Nazis who actually look like Nazis, rather than the Committees for Public Morality that are presently crucifying Jordan Peterson, and that is sort of connected to what this thread is addressing. But.

So just my two cents. Not really trying to argue anything in particular, just felt like I wanted to contribute to an interesting discussion I've been following.

>>8748363
>fedora tipping regurgitation of classical music.

When did liking the best and most complicated music ever created become "fedora tipping". How musically illiterate and smug do you have to be to discard nearly the entire Western tradition of music as "fedora tipping" ? If the quality of classical music isn't self-evident to you then there's not even a point in arguing for it.

>>8756103
>best
Not an argument
>most complicated music
[citation needed]

In either case its Fedora because the type of troglodytes who promote them for reactionary reasons (including you it seems) have no real appreciation for music, its just a pretentious fashion statement like a fedora.

>>8756103
>When did liking the best and most complicated music ever created become "fedora tipping". How musically illiterate and smug do you have to be to discard nearly the entire Western tradition of music as "fedora tipping" ? If the quality of classical music isn't self-evident to you then there's not even a point in arguing for it.
I've no idea how you missed the point so hard. Listening to or liking classical music isn't fedora tipping. Tipping your fedora at everyone who tries to innovate or build on the tradition is fedora tipping.

File: bc.jpg (79KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 1920x1080px

>>8756057
Might as well diagram my own logical fallacies here, for what it's worth:

>stand in front of a painting, try not to think, have Schopenhauerian aesthetic moment
>at the same time, be anxious about mythology which is full of ideology

>praise adorno for Making Modernism Great Again, b/c it disarms primitive inclinations to violence
>reject adorno for being overly intellectual, then side with Peterson against politicized aesthetics, etc

All of this would be true. I guess my point here is to say that in the 21C art is in this weird space, and virtually all of our lives have become completely interpolated by aesthetic experience (commercialism, advertising, media, video games, etc.) that we now take much of this for granted, and also because if we *don't* take it for granted we will go insane or w/evs. I guess all I'm saying is that the critical theory which gave us so much postwar continental philosophy (and which is less critical today than hegemonic, perhaps both in academia as well as in a more sublimated sense in culture, where irony and cynicism have become the norm) that perhaps the rejoinder is to try and take the modernist approach once again.

Criticism builds on criticism, I think, in infinite multiplication, and this is why people feel that they are being pushed ever-further back from "the real." My own feeling is that reality really today is just the mimetic, and that there is no going back to the old ways. This kind of stuff is anathema to romantic alt-right nostalgic-visionary stuff, but it's equally disastrous to left-progressivism, which is searching for a "real" core of identity that can engender a politics of equality. Neither of these are realistic goals, but they play off of one another - the more one side builds, the more the other side comes back at it. It winds up looking like the presidential debates, where both candidates only wind up speaking to their own audiences and not actually to each other.

So whatever "art" is in the modern sense, it's definitely not going to be "universal," because criticism itself may have taken an ideological turn that it can't go back from. At least, it doesn't seem to me that way. I think art is whatever moves the big economic chains forward, and because we are all beholden to this system - unless we go full on Cormac McCarthy/Thoreau/whatever and retreat to the wilderness, I have a hard time separating criticism from capitalism. And it fucks with my head.

At least, that's how it seems to me. I'm basically a shut-in with a McJob, so I have no real irons in these fires. Warrants mentioning, I suppose.

File: ChJuF0kUgAAJOES.jpg-large.jpg (75KB, 885x552px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 885x552px

>>8756154
One more.

The difference between postmodernism and what I might be tempted to call mimeticism is the reversal of the position of the subject: in postmodernism, there is still a real subject in there, and everyone else is a real subject, and between them is this infinite play of signification. If you take that one step further, you would wind up with a world which is nothing but interplay with no subjects at all. Kind of frightening, and of course, one is tempted to ask - but anon, go fuck yourself, you are writing this - except that I'm not really writing anything. I'm just responding.

>inb4 we can all see that, faggot

I think this is what would be so disturbing to even the most hardened critical theorists, that in the end the world becomes composed of theory without critics, in much the same way that perhaps philosophers such as Baudrillard will describe a world of desires without desirers. Adorno would have been one of these, because the last thing he would have wanted was an unlimited play of desires without justification or teleology. But that is how it is with the consumer capitalism that we are all endorsing, consciously or not, and aesthetics is how it happens.

But this is not my blog, so I'll stop there.

File: 1473743692909.jpg (658KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

658KB, 1920x1200px

Rrrraarrgh...sorry.

Is it even possible to talk about with a straight face about a split between 'high' and 'low' culture anymore? The point is that the only split that will remain is the one between *rich* and *poor* culture, which - as long as we have a system of capitalism which manufactures scarcity at the same rate which it manufactures profit - is going to perpetuate its own infinite cycle of criticism, because there is always going to be someone, somewhere, who doesn't have enough, and that person in the end is going to be tempted to write books about it...

I mean it this time. Not my blog (and I don't have a blog either).

>>8752272
>the only thing held in common by most human cultures in most human history is anti-Semitism
Pretty sure 'most human cultures in most human history' hadn't even heard of Jews.

File: 1460849245377.png (220KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 1024x768px

>>8752272
the only universality is that men are betas

File: tumblr_nqwliyDKML1r5e698o1_500.jpg (141KB, 500x596px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 500x596px

>>8756313
Can't even disagree with this. The more philosophy I read, and the more I think, the more I come to think that this is in the end what needs to be said.

I liked Peterson's advice: Say No To Happiness. I think what happens is that people get too cozy with Nietzsche about this stuff, because Nietzscheanity has just as much capacity for ressentiment as anything else. There are plenty of odious shitheads who love to quote Nietzsche and are repulsive to be around. I've been one of them for a long time.

Say No To Happiness: I don't know why this sounds so good. It doesn't mean be miserable, it just means don't be a grown infant. Shame is always the transcendental lever. The hardest thing to do is to resist the urge to be a beta, but without shitting on the next guy to help you achieve that goal. But yeah, trying not to be the last man is probably more than enough to fill the plate.

Thanks then for the interesting conversation, anons, and good luck. I'm going to try and not to be completely pathetic today. That's not going to be easy.

>>8748307
the Frankfurt school is full of awesome, weird, and often misanthropic stuff. Nothing as limp as the "political correctness" stuff that the right tries to pin on them

fun fact: identity politics, cultural marxism, and political correctness were all made up by conservative commentators so they could make the things that they didn't understand or that scared them seem like an ideology

>>8756556

the irony of the second half of your post is that the tumblr left embraces those spooks as their own marching orders.

>>8753393
A self facilitating media node/ 'ironic' internet personality. I think Chris Morris 2005 series Nathan Barley predicted the rise of Sam Hyde. I guess MDE must be Morris fans.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rqfkuc5mawg

>>8753180
Paul Gottfried is the true intellectual leader of the alt-right and whatever remains of paleoconservatism, but people overlook him because he's an old Jew.

>>8748363
>classical music
Doesn't exist in the 20th century you fucking idiot.

>>8751779
When criticism of the Establishment becomes the norm, then that criticism becomes the new Establishment.

It's pretty simple.

The kind of people who believe in that stuff are really horrible at thinking outside of in-groups and out-groups so its always an us vs them situation. They have a strong incline to protect what they think their culture is which means scapegoating whoever they think the enemy is who wants to threaten their way of live. This enemy is usually the "left" and anyone on that spectrum gets in-grouped as something they can complain about.

File: 1447214060580.gif (267KB, 263x540px) Image search: [Google]

267KB, 263x540px

>>8752393
>Dr. Nietzsche
>>8753201
I am clearly the leader of the alt-right!

>>8756948
Whatever dork

>>8755594
>2deep4u
It's more about transevaluating beauty by transgressing musical limits.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6Ai9TfcGfI
Is undoubtably beautiful.

File: josephcampbell.jpg (44KB, 449x200px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 449x200px

>>8756980
Straight facts no doubt. The ecology of ressentiment

>>8756313
Said it right, I think. Put in a perhaps more noble language, and a quote from pic related:

He who fails to become a hero becomes another victim to be saved.

I like that even better than the famous line from The Dark Knight, about heroes and villains. You don't have to save the world. Because to me this makes total sense. The more you become a victim, the more you become someone else's problem. You don't have to be a fucking ubermensch yourself. Maybe just avoid being the cause of one appearing, because once they do there's no stopping what comes next.

>tl;dr cuck cuck, says the cuck

>>8754518
>/pol/'s concerns regarding the Jews are not valid, but in reality I think their anti-semitism is only skin deep, a mostly aesthetic affectation which they enthusiastically adopt because it's so handy to be able to do ((((this)))) when faced with opposition. Their hatred for blacks and muslims is much more palpable, and their hatred for ideological opponents is even worse.
This is spot on.

File: yang.png (64KB, 154x251px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 154x251px

>>8756398
http://sacred-texts.com/tao/ycgp/ycgp09.htm

File: Baoshi_Mirror Lake.jpg (107KB, 534x890px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 534x890px

>>8757491
I suspect that you may be wise, so bear with me on this.

I spent this summer immersing myself in Chinese philosophy, and I love the Tao, although I'm very new to it. Would be happy to talk about it. I did this after living in Korea for a few years and completely failed to appreciate what I was looking at (namely, a prosperous and happily Confucian society). Anyways: returned home, and was all in on Zizek, and then Deleuze blasted all that into orbit, and I wound up thinking about China instead, b/c fuck yeah martial arts. Matter of fact there was a cool thread percolating here about it just the other day that was going well until some fuckface positivist showed up and everyone fled the scene. Was really a shame, in fact, because the Tao is no joke but good luck trying to persuade someone who is convinced all philosophy is for idiots. Even if that is the case I need some sugar on that pill before I take it. Anyways.

Having said all that, this parable is new to me, and I do appreciate it, so I want to thank you for sharing. The Tao is always a good look because I am inclined to insta-reaction and I have not yet overcome my perverse urge to say things aloud, because I am a manchild who thinks he knows things.

So if you are wise and knowing about these things, I'd be more than happy to hear more of whatever it is that you are thinking. Two of my friends are serious Buddhists - one a practicing monk, one just very intense about it - and I always feel like a complete asshole trying to sell them on Nietzsche when we meet. Formless nondual Eastern mysticism is the way to go, but I still have fantasies about diving into piles of money like Scrooge McDuck because life is complicated and the Tao doesn't make things nice and easy for me. I think these thoughts in somebody's basement. I dream of having disgusting wealth and caring about no one but myself.

So do share your thoughts, Tao-anon. I'm not a serious philosopher, but I do enjoy the sound of my own voice, as you can tell, and it's more interesting when someone brings based Chinese philosophy to the party.

>that genuinely was a good parable, thank ye sir

>>8756276
People accept the capitalist machinery circumstances and often create tgeir own niche groups in which they would turn away from the high low distinction, albeit not completely, to make their own criteria of high and low.

>or this
It seems to me that it would be impossible to be able to talk from a position where you supposedly do not keep a straight face. Like look at the circumstances you put: every high and low position could be exchanged and those position themselves alienated from each other. It would lead you to a position where you wouldn't be able to see things as high or low but by your own cruelty to distinct. Or position where you have higher knowledge than what representation offers, be a node within a closed system which is capable of looking from infinity.

File: pb.jpg (61KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 850x400px

>>8757561
>it would lead you to a position where you wouldn't be able to see things as high or low but by your own cruelty to distinct. Or position where you have higher knowledge than what representation offers, be a node within a closed system which is capable of looking from infinity

This is exactly what I am afraid of, anon, and I think it is where things are headed, and this is why I lament these things on 4chan. It's not a well-thought out plan.

Let me be more explicit. Universal criteria of high and low, I submit, are based on fantasy and on wealth, but the fantasy disappears without the wealth. I think Bordieu analyzed this pretty well, but I also think he remains a Marxist at heart and I think that this is all going to become increasingly passé in the age of hyper-capital and mimesis. I could be wrong. If the recent election was any indication, economic scarcity doesn't bring the left together into any kind of unity, it drives them apart. I am wholly prepared to admit that that is a 100% hot-take intuition completely ungrounded by facts or empirical research. I am as random a guy as they come.

So it's not that I'm unable to keep a straight face about all this myself. My face is pretty much uniform: despair. What I mean is that I think it is very hard to valorize any kind of 'authentic' high culture without noticing the elephant in the room: bags of money and ready credit. That's my obsessional interest in life: money. Not, like, economics, but fetishism and aesthetics. I am a weird dude.

So I'm not saying I can't see what you're saying here, I'm saying that that also is how I feel about things: that total economic determinism dovetails towards a dystopian nightmare of arbitrary cruelty pegged to the value of the dollar. We suffer because the economy suffers. And I do not like it, but I am highly skeptical of mass movements to be able to change this.

I like psychoanalysis, because I think much commodity fetishism can be overcome in this way, and I like the Tao also, because it disrupts a priori any chance for cathexis: the Tao that can be named is not the true Tao. I do like these things and I think they are helpful.

But the world beyond? Not so much. I'm kind of a misanthrope in that sense, and rapidly becoming a repetitive one at that, but I'm very open to learning something new. Would be delighted, to be honest.

Once again: I'm not saying that the worst possible view, which would be arbitrary cruelty based on economic determinism, is a good thing. It's just what my own sad and degenerate thoughts point to. So I like anachronistic guys like Campbell, for example, who will say: fuck wealth, try to follow the path of the hero instead. Knowing, of course, in the 21C that the path of the hero historically leads to some incredibly bad stuff. It is compromised up and down, and that's I come here - to see if anyone else feels the same way. Or if they feel differently in ways that I can learn from.

>Please notice me Schoenberg-senpai, your music is so good and much better than that nasty reactionary Stravinsky.


>'I have never been able to bear the fellow [...] It is disgusting, by the way how he treats Stravinsky

Adorno on suicide watch

>>8757003

That quartet is still tonal though, just approaching the edge.

Janacek is great at any rate though

>>8757003
Just wanted to say thank you for posting this also, it's better than my own degenerate ramblings which, let's face it, aren't really all that interesting anyways. More Adorno-tier music guys, that's what he was really into anyways, fuck capitalism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbGV-MVfgec

He liked this one a lot
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJSvA8oP7rw

the frankfurt school is paranoid anti science conspiracy theory fuel aka sjws

>>8757539
If you liked it you should read the other bits of Yangzi that remain, they're there on the same page.

As for your questions...

I'm having a hard time trying to answer everything at once. I think the problem is that its ethos is still the same from ancient times. It's still concerned with man as this ideal object, this thing with action outside of its own enviroment, and then putting things into place, about who's who, hows and how muchs and so on. So we end with endless competition, posturing, measuring. We have a number of mental checklists going at all times. Even when we say we shouldn't have those desires, we're operating in the same way.

The East got around this years ago, or you could say it didn't develop it at all to begin with. If you take Peterson's comment, he's working under a false dichotomy in which there's complacency on one side and exhaustion on the other. Both are really impossible when you think about it, if you look at your life in more than one term. Perhaps you'll be the mot renouned philosopher of all, but some other aspect of life will fail you still. So on with everything. But frankly, do you really need all those things? Some times it is better to dream of things than to live them. Why resent your dreams? Why be so hasty to "make it"? What are you trying to prove?

This where Nietzsche fails, in my opinion. He's all about the declarations and the prophecies. At the end all he fears is neutrality. He wishes to be noticed. He might call himself the devil, but he can't commit the atrocity of calling himself that nothing. He gives all the power in the world to that nothing, that way--by making it his enemy, it becomes his only weakness. Can you imagine how dangerous it is, to make something so nebulous what you're afraid of? Can you see why we are as a society, as we are now?

Ironically, people don't see how incredibly powerful that neutrality is. To flow unfixedly like water and be capable of eroding anything. To be one with that great thing we call the world. The resentful immediately think this is subservient, but it isn't if you don't chastisize or praise yourself for it. People keep rejecting the things that make what they are through opposition. They desire to be invincible to reign in a world where only they exist. It's very illogical, to reign over yourself like that. I for one, get pretty sick of myself at times. I'm a great guy, but it gets tiring. Being the ubermensch, its prophet or its follower, it all seems so silly to me now. I feel much larger than that, but it's no cause for elation--it is what it is.

>When Zhuangzi was about to die, his disciples expressed a desire to give him a sumptuous burial. Zhuangzi said, "I will have heaven and earth for my coffin and coffin shell, the sun and moon for my pair of jade discs, the stars and constellations for my pearls and beads, and the ten thousand things for my parting gifts. The furnishings for my funeral are already prepared - what is there to add?

>>8757796
Sweet cuppin' cakes anon either read the thread or post some music

File: 1470191762532.jpg (19KB, 483x695px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 483x695px

>>8757796
You should at least read Adorno and Horkheimer if you want to understand the world we are currently living in. You know, like how mass culture (including the mass culture /pol/ is now pushing) makes people very susceptible to fascism.

File: CuQyR8eWAAAYNeN.jpg (101KB, 549x720px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 549x720px

>>8757802
This post is by no means exhaustive. I could have gone on and on, but it would a) probably stop making sense, b) life is getting in the way. If you have any specific questions, it'd be helpful to post them. I'll answer them in a while.

>>8757802

I'm >>8757539 and some others. And all I'm going to say here is that this is exactly the stuff I come to here to hoping to read. I'm glad to know that there are other people thinking about this also, and I will be thinking about what you've posted here.

>what is there to add

It sounds so easy, when he says it like that. And holy shit could anything be more fucking difficult.

Take care anon, thanks again.

>>8757629
You do accept this machine as in identifying through it and so believe in suffering and nightmares. Wealth can create significators as well as signs, but are you dissappointed by this? You accepted it already, this is so the true and the only, there are no unreal copies. Finding the true is just a fiction you tell yourself. Authenticity and high culture is already interpreted multiple ways, your despair might some day lead to those bags of money, or no bags and much of valor.

Why we should overcome commodity fetishism? Personally, I like it. Also I don't believe there is any other mode without commodity except instinctual survival.

Your hero is already capitalist safety stamp approved

>>8757827
>come to here to hoping to read
>tfw i is philosoraptor

>>8750741
Various is a bad example. I don't know about his translated works but in France he definitely rides the idpol train.

File: b.jpg (132KB, 640x551px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 640x551px

>>8757834
I mean I can't lie, anon. It's not like I haven't read Nietzsche up and down and I understand the heroic-tragic perception. Truth, illusion and fiction form a very complicated, and seductive, knot. Maybe I'm just trying to move on to something else at the moment. Not sure why, tbqh.

>Why we should overcome commodity fetishism?

This is by no means a crazy question. There is, no doubt, not going to be any abolishment of capital. I certainly don't want this, since it's giving us the internet, among much else. As a friend of mine was saying just the other day, it's unbridled violence and desire that will eventually get us into space. Quite a thought. I guess I kind of thought that, for some reason, going to space meant post-scarcity thought as well. Not sure about this anymore.

I guess my own sense now is of the larger consequences of this: ecological, for instance, or political. We would, and should, all like to live and consume like affluent first-worlders. But I am not sure if the planet itself can support this, and even before that there is the ever-fragile international political order of things, which may get a little more complicated as resources like oil, water, food and so on become scarce. At some point that's going to to happen. As Frank Herbert says, The Spice Must Flow.

So it's that I am both disappointed and resigned, is what I mean to say. By the time world leaders are on the news telling us that We Must All X, it's because the economic/global pinball was set in motion a long time ago, and now it has guttered out, and this is why they have appeared to tell us what to do. That's all. Politics strikes me as simply being the media form of economic determinism, and after a while you just tend to acquire a jaded sort of perspective on this stuff. I'm starting to feel as though I am spamming this image, but hey. There are worse memes out there.

>Finding the true is just a fiction you tell yourself.

True enough, but I'll go a step farther as well: the truth itself is a fiction, but fictions are what construct our reality. And that's arguably as good as I'm going to get. Being a failed fiction writer - surely this is no surprise! - has actually taught me quite a lot about this stuff.

>Your hero is already capitalist safety stamp approved

Would you mind explaining this further? I'm not sure what you mean, but you might be on to something interesting here and I'd like to know more. You're right, I also don't think there is any other mode either. It's just that sometimes capitalism *itself* just still feels very much like instinctual survival, except in a fancier context. Nature and culture really aren't so different, and, well, I'm not as all-in on Nietzsche as I used to be. As the above post indicates, I'm finding a lot in Eastern stuff these days, but it doesn't make the world beyond any less sunny. Anyways.

>>8757854
Sorry, who's Various? Badiou by way of autocorrect?

>>8757874
>*more* sunny

File: Liezi rides the wind.jpg (188KB, 1600x1157px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 1600x1157px

>>8757827
http://www.wussu.com/laotzu/laotzu33.html
http://www.wussu.com/laotzu/laotzu70.html
http://www.wussu.com/laotzu/laotzu73.html
http://www.wussu.com/laotzu/laotzu76.html
http://www.wussu.com/laotzu/laotzu81.html

Don't worry, if it were something that's outside your scope, you would not do it. There's nowhere for you to go but where you already are. There's no one for you to be but who you are. The mind is a collection or ever decaying appearances; like a river, it's never the same. Don't try to pin it down and its thoughts will not stagnate.

Remember to do, forget having done, and don't wish that you will do. Do today, do tomorrow, maybe fail on the third day, and on the fourth do. Take them one at a time. Don't accumulate, but don't stop. Don't use anything else but what you have now. Be patient, and things will seem immediate.

bla bla =)

>>8751854
How did you steal the iphone?

>>8758343
chloroform and a sexy dance number

always work as a pair, don't attempt phone-jacking solo. trust me

>>8757329
>Facts
Don't exist. Enjoy being a pseud.

>>8757754
It's tonal but its aim is the same as non-tonal music that isn't just trying to be bad for its own sake.

>>8757808
Adorno's Authoritarian Personality is deeply problematic. It pathologized the working class and helped initiate the Left's shift away from class politics toward identity politics. You can draw a direct ideological line from Adorno to the neoliberal Democrats of today

Marcuse is similarly problematic.

File: Cle2eLiUoAExMLn.jpg (222KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 1080x1920px

>>8757808
>implying fascism is bad.

Fascism is cool. I got a fashy haircut at the mall. It only cost me 50 bucks.

>>8756398
>I'm going to try and not be completely pathetic today
>spends virtually the entire day shitposting on 4chan
>feels good man

guess i'll have to try again tomorrow