/lit/ has any comments on the Comments on the Society of Spectacle?

>>8945841
i'm pretty sure my copy of the zone book edition of society of the spectacle includes comments on society of the spectacle but i haven't actually checked to confirm this

>>8945841
It's readable. I found that much of it is out of date.
>the working class is also occluded from representing itself in the throng of images that make up the society of the spectacle
Post-internet, that statement doesn't make much sense.
>The critique of the spectacle, that is to say, modern society insofar as it is the concrete lie, the realization of an inverted world, ideological consumption, concentrated and expanded alienation
New Testament tier whining about the evils of the world.
The only interesting parts of it for me were the quotations from Feuerbach and Freud.

>>8946863
fuck you

Late Debord is interesting desu

>Must we assimilate them or "respect cultural diversities"? Inept, false choice. We can no longer assimilate anyone: neither the young, nor the French workers, nor even the provincials or the old ethnic minorities (Corsicans, Bretons, etc.) because Paris, a destroyed town, has lost its historic role, which was making the French. What is a centralism without [a] capital? The concentration camp did not create any Germans among the deported Europeans. The diffusion of the concentrated spectacle only makes spectators uniform. In a language that is simply that of advertising, one gargles with the rich expression "cultural diversities." What cultures? There no longer are any. Neither Christian, nor Muslim; neither socialist nor scientist. Do not speak of the absent. If we face the truth and the evidence for a single instant, we find there is nothing but the worldwide-spectacular (American) degradation of all culture.

>How many de facto foreigners are there in France? (And not only by juridical statute, by policy, by facial features). It is obvious that there are so many that one must ask instead: how many of the French remain and where are they? (And what today characterizes a French person?) How would this person remain French? One knows that the birth rate is falling. Isn't this normal? The French can no longer support their children. They send them to school at the age of three, and at least until the age of sixteen, to learn illiteracy. And before they are three, there are more and more people who find them "unsupportable" and strike them more or less violently. Children are still loved in Spain, Italy and Algeria, and among the Gypsies. Not often in France at the moment. Neither lodgings nor towns are made for children (from whence comes the cynical publicity of the governmental urbanists on the theme of "opening the town to children"). On the other hand, contraception is widespread and abortion is available. Almost all the children in France today were wanted. But not freely! The voter-consumer does not know what he wants. He "chooses" something that he does not want. His mental structure no longer has the coherence to remember that he had wanted something when he finds himself disappointed by the experience of this very thing.

>In the spectacle, a society of classes has very systematically wanted to eliminate history. And now one claims to regret this sole particular result of the presence of so many immigrants, because France thus "disappears"? Comic. It disappears for many other reasons and more or less rapidly on nearly all terrains.

http://www.notbored.org/immigrant-question.html

>>8946999
late debord > early debord