>Communism promised to be both morally and economically s

File: tips fedora.jpg (42KB, 479x720px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 479x720px

> I consider myself a classical liberal and strongly value individualism and reason.

>Communism consists on saying you're opressed

File: guy-on-home_400x400[1].jpg (27KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 400x400px

>>9857843
>I think capitalism and traditional values and hierarchy are compatible

The author doesn't say anything ridiculous in this document and tries, at every step, to be deferential. It was still met with "I'm literally shaking!"-tier moral panic.

>>9857933
The author says many ridiculous things, he's got some right ideas but he's clearly still indoctrinated

>we talk so much about unconscious bias as it applies to race and gender
>I strongly believe in gender and racial diversity, and I think we should strive for more.
>some on the Right deny science that runs counter to the “God > humans > environment” hierarchy

what an imbecile, Google employees must have it pretty bad that even such a leftist got upset

>>9857933
>doesn't say anything ridiculous
I've only read the excerpt in the OP, but it seems pretty ridiculous to say Marxists have transitioned from class warfare to identity politics when such a critique ceases to be Marxist. Either the Marxists abandoned Marxism in favor of neoliberal idpol or the author doesn't quite know what Marxism is.

>>9857933
By defining your politics in reaction to this tiny subsection of a community you make yourself much more contemptible than even the most earnest SJW, sonny.

Women, on average, have more:
Openness directed towards feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas. Women generally also have a stronger interest in people rather than things, relative to men (also interpreted as empathizing vs. systemizing).
These two differences in part explain why women relatively prefer jobs in social or artistic areas. More men may like coding because it requires systemizing and even within SWEs, comparatively more women work on front end, which deals with both people and aesthetics.

/lit/ btfo

Women are the true aesthetes of our age

>>9857975
>reads Simon Baron-Cohen once
He's not wrong though

>>9857959
If the new ideology is so isomorphic to the old one, it's not a stretch to call it by the same name, don't be pedantic

The accuracy of whether it has anything to do with Communism is besides the point in my opinion. The point remains that oppressor-oppressed dynamics of any kind is subhuman and that this is incredibly transparent to anyone with eyes. Only subhumans identify as victims and go on about it. And funny enough, one of Marx's most revered individuals was Spartacus, a prime example of how your status in society really has little to do with who you are and who you will become.

>>9857986
>class-based analysis based on material conditions is isomorphic with 'muh identity' idealism

Kill you are selve

File: qqADRSKhQCPP9p9RT-fo5X-NIChbfVIy-FdfrRCLFXg.jpg (69KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1024x576px

>>9857986

Very true, as a Marxist I can say we don't care about the class gap anymore and are completely focused on gender and race now.

>>9857992
>subhumans

The oppressor-oppressed dynamic is equally harmful and retarded as the subhuman-ubermensch dynamic
God has created us all in his image

The fact that such a milquetoast mail generated outrage shows how far beyond the point of saving Google already is. If that's Google, imagine what the hot young Silicon Valley startups are like. Jim is 100% correct on this, dark days are coming.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcTdlCtW2dA

>>9858011
Then you aren't Marxist

>>9857992
The problem is that both marxists and SJWs view hierarchical systems as inherently oppressive, and that an ability to climb that system is always unearned. If that's the case, then why do anything? If I can't render advantages onto myself by hard work, then I'm stuck in my own mediocre life.

>>9858003
certainly isomorphic in it's real world application, same pitiful yet disgusting people support it, and similar logic is used to justify it

if you fail to see it you lack the ability to abstract

File: 1501967663470.jpg (45KB, 630x748px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 630x748px

>>9858018
> linking Mister Metokur

Are you going to link Sargon of Akkad next? Fucking retard.

>>9858027
wow, you watch Peterson too? interedasting

>>9858015
We are not equal.

>>9858031
I like your hot arguments, kid.

File: moron[1].jpg (204KB, 283x424px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 283x424px

>>9858029
>materialists and idealists are basically the same

File: 3bff2852559edb2d1d4ce5d75594496b--roman-sculpture-yellow-hair.jpg (12KB, 236x300px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 236x300px

>>9857843
>ITT: Leftypol autism
Weep! WEEP! Your tears are delicious. How does it feel knowing your movement is just idpol incarnate now?

>>9858048
>your movement is just idpol incarnate now?
So is yours

>>9858034
Rich and poor have this in common: The LORD is Maker of them all.

Make it a God-man dynamic - your's is one of selfish conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourself.

SJW Identity politics is just an Americanization of Marxist ideology.

You can whine all you want about how it isn't Marxist because classic Marx terminology revolves around economic classes instead of racial ones, but functionally it's the exact same fucking thing.

>>9858071
>but functionally it's the exact same fucking thing.
lol

It's not Marxist 'terminology' that revolves around class struggle it's its very fucking essence.

>>9858071
Yes, google is the height of marxism

>>9858088

Pro-tip there are class struggles besides economic ones

>>9858099
Protip: Not really

>>9858099
non-economics classes aren't Marxist classes. Marxism is materialist.

>>9858104
Materialist doesn't mean devoid of all more abstract notions than monetary differences
Marxism proposes a quite laughable and obviously failed economic system, it's natural that it's proponents have switched their spiel a little

File: images (38).jpg (38KB, 358x411px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 358x411px

>>9858104
>the meaning of words can't change
The question is, is it USEFUL to speak about Marxism as the set of more abstract attitudes about class levels and equality rather than ONLY economic systems. You don't get to decide the answer to that question for everyone.

Its like if you were around when Marx was using Hegelian theory to support his ideas you'd shout at him: IT'S NOT MATERIALISTIC. If we can understand each other, we can have a conversation about things.

I think maybe people will come to call it first wave Marxism and second wave etc.

>>9858104

>Marxism is materialist

LOL

>>9858122
1. Yes it does, and 2. its not just mere "monetary diferences"
He also didn't propose an "economic system"; he analysed capitalism
>>9858125
>You don't get to decide the answer to that question for everyone.
Well it's a stupid question since the idea of equality WELL predates Marx.
>Its like if you were around when Marx was using Hegelian theory to support his ideas you'd shout at him: IT'S NOT MATERIALISTIC.
I wouldn't need to because that was Marx's own critique of Hegel.

>>9858125
>The question is, is it USEFUL to speak about Marxism as the set of more abstract attitudes about class levels and equality rather than ONLY economic systems.
No because it expands the term to the point it no longer becomes an useful identifier like how people use fascism to describe any vaguely authoritarian regime or person.

The biggest issue people have with his manifesto is the notion of inherent gender differences. Why is it so difficult for women to accept this?

>>9858064
All of politics is inherently based on the promotion of an identity, comrade.

>>9858143
Yes but in the same way Marx took hegels idea of an inevitable metaphysical uprising of Thesis, antithesis, synthesis and applied it to capitalism, people have now taken Marxs idea of an inevitable social uprising in the form of class and identity politics. It's the same underlying application of the inevitable (self fulfilling) prophecy of revolution.

>>9858066
The Lord does not create equally.

>>9858165
1. I don't think they (idpolers) think it's inevitable. If they do, they're wrong, because Marx was wrong about that too, as was Hegel.
2. idpolers never talk about class

>>9858168
I will no longer respond to your sophism, I've said my piece.

>>9857843

Humanity was a mistake.

>>9858143
Marx did propose an economic policy. It's "no private property" and "to each his abilities and to each his needs."
In theory "the people" owns everything and everyone works according to his abilities and is given what he needs. The problem is that "the people" is, in practice, "the state" and the state is run by individuals who controls the most violence.The second problem is who decides each individual's needs and abilities? Is it the state or the individual? If the state decides than in actuality it is powerful individuals, the party leaders, that gets to decide if you need food or nukes.
The end results of Marxism in practice is authoritarian dictatorships. Mao, Stalin, Kimmy, are all results of true communism.

>>9858178
I think they do act that it's inevitable, I mean this is why there are so many memes about people so sure Hillary would win etc. They seem to genuinely not BELIEVE it when people don't share their views. And this is what we're saying: they are talking about class separate from ecenomics. Think of the phrase "second class citizen," which brings to mind a whole set of attitudes from the majority of society about that person, not ONLY their financial status (although that is also claimed to be influenced by the attitudes).

>>9858197
That's Leninism you're describing. Marx had no interest in the state.
>>9858199
The fact they support Hillary should give you a clue: THEY'RE FUCKING LIBERALS (not Marxists). And that use of the word "class" has nothing to do with Marx.

>>9858160
A lot of women will accept that. What they won't accept is the neckbeard claiming superiority at almost all intellectual pursuits in the next breath.

The author of this particular manifesto isn't a particularly great or noteworthy programmer. Why is he attempting to play arbiter?

>>9858197
> Mao, Stalin, Kimmy, are all results of true communism.
now you're the ones pulling the "not real communism!" meme

>>9858213
And the whole base of the argument is that a Marxism and postmodernism hybrid ideology has been adopted by the liberals as their core system of values. Look at any Marxist rally poster, always a black woman shouting in victorious rage.

>>9858220
I've read four or five articles on this story, and all of them quote angry women (one article said that they were "shaking with anger") talking about the pseudoscientific notion of inherent gender differences. It's a heretical belief

>>9858232
So you agree that they're liberals and not actually Marxist? they just co-opted some of its language to push a cultural agenda.

>>9858213
>Marx had no interest in the state
One of the main fissures between Bakunin and Marx was that Marx thought that the state could be used in the dictatorship of the proletariat whereas Bakunin was a purer anarchist. Telling lies on the internet is ugly, anon.

>>9858258
Yes. But because of their influence that IS Marxism now. Maybe not traditional Marxism, maybe not "proper" Marxism in your eyes, but that is what the concept has come to include because of their agenda.

>>9858220
He said that women were superior at aesthetics and managing people. He didn't claim male superiority over women, he claimed male superiority when it comes specifically to programming.

>>9857992
>Spartacus, a prime example of how your status in society really has little to do with who you are and who you will become.
I don't see how. Spartacus's status heavily limited what he could become. His choices was die a slave, hope to be freed, or revolt and hope to escape before the superior Roman forces crush him. Accepting that there are inherit differences in people that influence possible outcomes then rejecting that inequalities in social status have anything to do with social outcomes comes off as absurd.

You can't push economic Marxism in the US because Americans are too strongly attached to their manifest destiny idea.
So you take the same theory but instead of drawing the battle lines along economic barriers you do it along racial ones, which is potent in the US since there's no strong cultural heritage. What I mean by no strong culture is that the US is still an abstract country in many senses.
If anything this new idpol Marxism is more potent than classical Marxism because race eats away at people's aesthetic vision of their society.

File: yikes.jpg (69KB, 953x730px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 953x730px

>>9857843
>the Marxist intellectuals transitioned from class warfare to gender and race politics.

>>9858269
>he claimed male superiority when it comes specifically to programming

Considering the garbage that's on his Github I don't think he's in a position to judge the programming ability of others. He isn't even on a real programming team at Google. What makes him qualified to make massive generalizations about programming when he himself is basically a layman?

>>9858310
*identity politics
shit's incredibly effective at undermining a society tho. who can blame them for being such crafty faggot kikes when they at least do such a good job at it?

>>9858265
I don't think that contradicts what I said t b h.They both thought the state sucked and wanted rid of it, ultimately. Marx was more open minded about using it as a tool and Bakunin was an edgelord.
>>9858267
No, not really. There are lots of Marxists around today that are critical of idpol. And many SJWs don't even call themselves Marxists, but liberals.

I'm not gonna say that there's NO connection between the two, but it certainly isn't a necessary connection.

>>9858316
He said on average men and women have differences in personality traits, and in desire for high-status jobs. It's not that big of a deal.

>>9858316
His purpose wasn't to position himself as a programming God who had to bear being around inferior women, his purpose was to complain about gender diversity programs at google that necessarily discriminate against more meritorious groups like men and asians.

Either what he said is true or it isn't. The fact that it's coming from him doesn't matter.

>>9858285
What he became was a historically recognized hero. That's greater than what the millions of other slaves throughout history ever became, even of the many who managed to escape. So, it's reasonable to deduce that who we are is dictated primarily by genetics and the environmental / cultural influence is minimal and only serves as a catalyst perhaps, or a contextual reference of one's greatness. And you might say that the environmental / cultural is what shapes or triggers or brings meaning and greatness into one's genetic disposition, well, if the genes aren't there then it's just not going to produce anything great. The genes even determine the complexity of the environmental / cultural. They are like hardware vs. software in computer science, but the difference here is that of MILLIONS of slaves and MILLIONS of slaves who became free, very, very, very few become powerful historical heroes. So say what you want about how it's all "coincidence" of a sort, or "convenient", the fact remains that it is RARE and thus special regardless.

>>9858324
>There are lots of Marxists around today that are critical of idpol. And many SJWs don't even call themselves Marxists, but liberals.

You mean sperg-Marxists who are still larping about capital. They're basically like Civil War reenactors.
And SJWs are notoriously ignorant about their own ideology. You can't rely on their self-perception for any rational dissection of their motives. If you take them at their word then you're just scheduling a trip down the rabbit hole.

>>9857956
i guess he's just trying to signal that he's "one of them" in order to try to get them to listen to his critique yet reassure them that some of the things they are trying to do can survive in a genuinely pluralistic corporate culture...
>>9857959
why resort to semantics and obfuscation of the issues when you can just concede that class politics has been coopted and redeployed to prosecute new forms of revolutionary thought?

File: archie bunker.jpg (6KB, 261x193px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 261x193px

>>9857843
>the Marxist intellectuals transitioned from class warfare to gender and race politics.

Goddammit, this shit is so stupid.

>but now the oppressor is the “white, straight, cis-gendered patriarchy.”

No the oppressor is still the fucking ruling class. If the ruling class was queer (and it is in a lot of cases) would the class-Cs working class suddenly be okay in acquiescing to their own humiliation?

>>9858357
No. E.g. Zizek, Terry Eagleton, Fredric Jameson have criticised idpol to varying degrees.
>And SJWs are notoriously ignorant about their own ideology
You won't get any argument from me on that

/lit/ - Literature
/lit/ - Literature
/lit/ - Literature
/lit/ - Literature
/lit/ - Literature

>>9858389
i'm tellin ya, there needs to be a /phi/

>>9858376
>No the oppressor is still the fucking ruling class.

How does that contradict what he said?
The oppressor/ruling class has been redefined to mean what he said.

>>9858395
It would just devolve into izek/Peterson/youtube celebs shitposting.

>>9858351
He has no proof that the gender diversity programs are doing harm. Most internal reported quality metrics have improved over the last few years. What's his basis? All available proof leads to him being yet another lonely bitter neckbeard.

File: Screen Shot 2017-08-06 at 8.26.00 PM.png (2MB, 1202x1103px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1202x1103px

I empathize with Peterson's supporters and the guy who wrote this piece, but the argument that SJW and/or "Postmodernist" discourse is bad because it sprung up from the corpse of Marxist discourse is so stupid. It's a basic informal fallacy, either pic related or guilt by association depending on how it's presented. Fuck that whole argument, how is it even possible that people can't think of something better

>>9857843
>full-10-page-anti-diversity-screed

I guess this inane Silicon Valley whinging was entirely cribbed from Peterson's dumb ass.

>>9857933

>It was still met with "I'm literally shaking!"-tier moral panic.

Maybe on twitter. From what I've seen most people are either using the memo as an example of retarded sexism in silicon valley or simply roasting the guy for his delusional crusade against the 'PC police' and 'social constructionism'. A private multinational corporation is "leftist"? Give me a fucking break.

Oh I guess the whole class liberation thing is hopeless because of that one time when Stalin attempted to turn feudal Russia into a stateless force toward global communism. [Everyone should know that you cannot bypass late-capitalism on the path to statelessness. Was the chaos and senseless violence of the French revolution proof that "the project of capitalism has failed?"] I guess we ought to simply be contented that our slavemasters are on hormone blockers and that I am forced to share a cubicle with a woman.

I mean holy shit you guys. This is a literature board. Step it up.

>>9858168

It is harder for a camel to enter the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.

What you have done onto the least of these, you have done onto me.

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

I can keep em coming big boy.

>>9858417

That's a total mischaracterization of the objection. That isn't "why" it's bad.

Linking it to Marxism is tidy because then you get to use muh 100 gorillion as ammunition. But that's literally just the beginning of why it's shit.

>>9858413
>lonely bitter neckbeard
There it is. This is simple prejudice on your part. You have no idea who the guy is, but you associate his beliefs with a particular class of people you happen to dislike so you attack him.

I think someone working for google would have a better idea of how diversity initiatives affect the working environment there that some guy on 4chan does.

Marx's greatest failure was not realizing that people are more attached to concepts like gender and skin color than economic status.

Modern left-wing ideology was a fucking mistake.

>>9858419
>maybe on twitter
Also the dozens of publications who've written articles decrying the "culture of sexism" in tech, and the higher ups in google who've written formal declarations rebuking what this guy said.

>>9858434
>There it is. This is simple prejudice on your part. You have no idea who the guy is

I know exactly who he is though. His name, Reddit and Facebook accounts were leaked yesterday.

>>9858366
>you can just concede that class politics has been coopted and redeployed to prosecute new forms of revolutionary thought?
It is not revolutionary. It serves Capital

>>9858232
>And the whole base of the argument is that a Marxism and postmodernism hybrid ideology has been adopted by the liberals as their core system of values.

And this is not true. Liberals adopted Marxism? The two are entirely antithetical. Postmodernism and Marxism are incompatible. How do you think the metanarrative of class conflict driving history fairs against a movement of thought that rejects metanarratives.

>Look at any Marxist rally poster, always a black woman shouting in victorious rage.

That's bullshit. Marxist representations of the working class tend to be inclusive abstractions in depiction of class unity. Even if you weren't just pulling shit out of your ass, what does that have to do with postmodernism?

It's like Peterson fans are operating on venn-diagram levels of simplicity when dealing with the history of ideas. Postmodernism=left=liberals=marxism=racial diversity=degeneracy. You could make convincing culturally conservative arguments if you stopped flinging around such obvious bullshit.

File: our_guy.jpg (227KB, 827x1071px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 827x1071px

>>9858434
> posts on KiA
> not a neckbeard

Pick one.

>>9858460

So then postmodernism's metanarrative is that there are no metanarratives.
You can do this shit all day which is why it's a fucking worthless ideology that has made modern thought pure cancer.

>>9858451
You know a name and a picture. You know less about him than I know about Marilyn Monroe, yet I don't claim to know her know well-enough to make judgements about her internal state and social life.

>>9858269
>he claimed male superiority when it comes specifically to programming.

Again, why is such a distinction under the purview of a mediocre neckbeard?

>>9858462
>posts on /lit/
>not a faggot

>>9858470
It's not. The connection between the male brain and spatial memory is pretty well-established. He's just saying what neuroscientists already know.

>>9858465
He's a gamer that was a regular poster on KiA and TheRedPill and wrote several massive Elliot Rodger tier rants about women. Calling him a neckbeard is hardly a stretch.

>>9858354
>So, it's reasonable to deduce that who we are is dictated primarily by genetics and the environmental / cultural influence is minimal and only serves as a catalyst perhaps, or a contextual reference of one's greatness.

No none of that is evident from the story of Spartacus. Human freedom happens at the level of consciousness, not as a result of neurology. One's genetics affect the spontaneous nature of our passions, but anyone of note wasn't driven by dna to whatever great thing they did.

> if the genes aren't there then it's just not going to produce anything great.

Literally give us a reason to consider this. Otherwise it is a non-sequitur.

>>9858430
>It is harder for a camel to enter the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.
Go ahead and explain this one. I'd like to know what you think it means.

>>9858431
>Linking it to Marxism is tidy because then you get to use muh 100 gorillion as ammunition.
Yeah, that would be Guilt by Association. Peterson's argument is more like Genetic Fallacy mixed with Guilt by Association

>But that's literally just the beginning of why it's shit.
I know

>>9858483
>Literally give us a reason to consider this.
I already laid out a point for consideration: Spartacus being one of hundreds of millions of slaves to become a historically recognized hero. Feel free to explain this phenomenon.

>>9858354
>What he became was a historically recognized hero
He didn't become a hero until centuries after his death, failed at what he set out to do, and died like a dog. Many other slaves and ex slaves would achieve far more in concrete goals than he ever did and the only reason he got as far as he did is because the Romans didn't take him seriously because of his slave status.

The rest of your post comes off as somewhat confused. There are good genetics vs environment articles like http://www.human.cornell.edu/hd/circ/publications/upload/The-Rhetoric-and-Reality-of-Gap-Closing.pdf. The two major points of that article is environmental factors do play a large role and once you reduce them the more inherited characteristics will come to the forefront so the gap doesn't close but becomes larger. That is different than arguments like yours that claim environmental factors are irrelevant in every single case.

>>9858357
>You can't rely on their self-perception for any rational dissection of their motives

So why claim that they represent ANY ideology? They don't follow Marxist principles, their ideas don't historically belong to development of Marxian ideas, they don't call themselves Marxists. You might as well say that they are the new permutation of the bourgeoisie that disrupted and perverted noble monarchist and ecclesiastical Europe.

>>9858489
>Yeah, that would be Guilt by Association. Peterson's argument is more like Genetic Fallacy mixed with Guilt by Association

I'm saying that's not Peterson's argument.
It kind of sounds like you just learned about this fallacy and are anxious to deploy it.

>>9858405
>The oppressor/ruling class has been redefined to mean what he said.

Then that isn't Marxism. The ruling class in a Marxist schema is the one who uses wage laborers to accumulate capital.

>>9858389
We're discussing an essay.

>>9858434

She isn't saying he's wrong because he's a neckbeard. She's saying he's a neckbeard because despite statistics on the matter, he still feels the need to grandstand about gamergate talking points.

>>9858479
So how does this invalidate the notion of inherent gender differences? Does the speaker matter more than the speech when it comes to judging its validity?

>>9858484
The eye of a needle was a gate in Jerusalem. A small gate, where the camels had to kneel to enter the city.

>>9858496

WELL because like Peterson says, their ideology rests on all of them and is thus diffused through their ranks.
So individually they don't fully comprehend what they are espousing but when they are all assembled or when you regard them as a totality it becomes clear.
Honestly all of this is self-evident if you have spent any time talking with SJWs.

>>9858510
You explained nothing. Tell me why that statement is the case.

>>9858448
>decrying the "culture of sexism" in tech

Yeah so that doesn't exactly equate to a "moral panic" does it?

>the higher ups in google who've written formal declarations rebuking what this guy said.

As is common practice when anyone makes waves in an industry and attracts media attention. They'd do the same if the guy called for an armed worker's revolution within the tech world.

>>9858501

Yeah that's the traditional dogma however it has evolved.
I don't know why you guys are so fixated on received dogma when it's clearly been adapting itself to new situations. I think you're just embarrassed by idpolers and don't want your precious ideology to be associated with them.
It's amazing how nothing in the real world is ever Marxism.

>>9858517
Rich people can feed their egos safely. When poor people do the same, they tend to die. Either in a foolish revolt or the aftermath, be it gulag or NKVD.

>>9858495
>He didn't become a hero until centuries after his death
Not very important. Here we are today talking about him. That's what's important.

You still really haven't explained the meaning of that phenomenon. Why did Spartacus, or any ex-slave with historical recognition for their triumphant or inspiring actions, become that while millions of others didn't? The only two possibilities I see are: "the soul" which appears a cop out response to me, or their genetic composition combined with their fate wove together a special moment.

>>9858506
This is an excuse to ignore the real story, which is whether gender diversity initiatives are useful and fair, and whether inherent gender differences exist and to what extent do they affect competency in STEM. That's the real story. And we've chosen to ignore that in order to focus on the guy who brought it up.

>>9858463
>So then postmodernism's metanarrative is that there are no metanarratives

Oh yeah just like philosophical skeptics can't claim that there is no truth because that in itself is a truth they hold? Yes they can. And pomos can easily claim that a rejection of metanarratives does not constitute a metanarrative. How the fuck do you think a rejection of metanarratives equates to one itself? Metanarratives are a positive analytic project; rejection of metanarratives is a negative project, a negation. A rejection of idealisms in favor of empiricism does not constitute another form of idealism.

>You can do this shit all day

Please continue because I feel like you might have some trouble explaining to me how in fact a rejection of metanarrativess constitutes in itself a metanarrative.

File: watt.jpg (28KB, 333x344px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 333x344px

watt

>>9858478

I know this. Did those neuroscientists go further in explaining how this makes women bad at programming? If not, can he or you site me another source?

>>9858543
>A rejection of idealisms in favor of empiricism does not constitute another form of idealism
>in favor of empiricism
You ignore this part. Besides, solipsism is the endgame of empiricism.

>>9858507
He claims that women are inferior at programming yet he provides absolutely no proof. In fact, the internal code quality metrics at the company he works for suggest the opposite.

The fact that he's a typical neckbeard that has never known the touch of a woman explains his motivation and apparent hatred.

File: IMG_0145.jpg (49KB, 604x404px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 604x404px

>>9858544
oh man that's a fucking clever meme. he's even birdlike as she is

>>9858521
What would constitute a moral panic in your eyes if thousands of tweets, dozens of articles, the US Department of Labor, and HR departments across the country all pushing a particular narrative doesn't meet your standard?

>>9858500
I have documents that prove I learned about it exactly two years ago, but nevermind.

If you want to explain further what the fuck you're talking about as opposed to claiming you have a point but refusing to make it, please do it

>>9858492
>Feel free to explain this phenomenon.

Why the fuck would his genetics have varied so extremely from those of all the other slaves from his region? Your own example proves that human freedom transcends genetics and environment. Did Spartacus have the hero mutation? Why weren't his brothers similarly successful?

>>9858543

It's just a basic paradox.
Their idea that no metanarrative is possible is their metanarrative.
You don't like it stated that way because it sounds ridiculous. Which it is.

>>9858534
>The only two possibilities I see are: "the soul" which appears a cop out response to me, or their genetic composition combined with their fate wove together a special moment.
The latter. The fate part happened to be notable individuals choosing to idealize him later because it fit their purposes which is why we are talking about him today.

>>9858561

I made my point several posts ago, which is that your fedora fallacy category is a misrepresentation to the objections that are being raised against idpol.
No one says it's bad "because" it's in the Marxist lineage. It's lineage is just an interesting footnote.

>>9858563
>Did Spartacus have the hero mutation?
Does it not seem evidently so? The rest of his ancestry did not achieve a status that high because they just didn't have the correct balance. Maybe they had the potential, but potential is a retroactive evaluation anyway. You are or you aren't.

>>9858547
This is like asking whether or not the people studying the relationship between genes and intelligence have demonstrated that black people are less suited to being academics. They would never claim such a thing, or even attempt to study it, because it's far too explosive a subject. Programming is a subject that's spatial-memory and working-memory intensive, and women are far less interested in it than men are in relatively gender equal societies (like Sweden). You'd have to be pretty blind not to see what's happening.

>>9858582
The boolean man is a metaphysical construct. We can externally limit people and their potential. Envy, especially, goes contrary to your claims.

>>9858534
>The only two possibilities I see are: "the soul" which appears a cop out response to me.

This is the possibility I have been trying to describe, but it isn't anything as ambiguous as the soul. Consciousness acts without prompt and is not determined by facticity because it is transcendent of factical existence. The fact that Spartacus and not any of his almost genetically identical kinsmen became a hero of history points both to circumstance/spontaneity and the absolute freedom of human transcendent consciousness.

>>9858552
See>>9858589

>never known the touch of a woman
I.e. Being sexually unsuccessful makes you a worse person, and only the approval of women can confer greatness onto someone

>>9858582
>Does it not seem evidently so?

It does not given that such a mutation would be absurd. Genetic fatalism is just as bad as astrological fatalism.

>>9858596
>Being sexually unsuccessful makes you a worse person

You're a worse person if you allow your pathetic rumination to become creepy sexual resentiment and then project it onto the unwitting public as some sort of a valorous declaration.

>>9858596
>Being sexually unsuccessful makes you a worse person

It strongly suggests that there's something deeply wrong with you.

>>9858607

That's an incredibly stupid thing to say, it often just suggests that there's something superficially wrong with you.

>>9858606
Being a discontent doesn't make your observations less true. Discontents are more likely to bring it up not just due to personal resentment, but due to the fact that being in that position makes you reflect on the differences between men and women and why you're in the position you're in. Rejection causes reflection, and reflection can lead to beliefs that are both correct and incorrect.

>>9858607
Being ugly and being wrong are two different things.

>>9857904
Communism would not work without this. It is what gives Communism reason. Why take away these people's power/money and distribute it evenly? Because they are oppressors and they've been treating us poorly all our lives!!!

>>9858564
>Their idea that no metanarrative is possible is their metanarrative

I explained to you why this isn't the case. You have yet to actually offer an argument. The cogito isn't as universally accepted as you might think.

>Their idea that no metanarrative is possible is their metanarrative.

A metanarrative is purposed for the unification of ideas and phenomenon. Rejecting that this is possible does not constitute a metanarrative in itself no matter how many times you feel like you can repeat it without offering a single premise toward that conclusion. If I reject scientific explanation for the processes of nature I have not as a consequence created my own version of science that rejects all other science; I have simply rejected science.

>>9858551
>You ignore this part. I wrote that part. Are you claiming that empiricism is really an idealism with a different hat on?

>Besides, solipsism is the endgame of empiricism.

Oh fuck off.

>>9858607
>I can never be a good or valuable person because I was born ugly
Now I know why villains are often portrayed as hideous

>>9858612
>>9858618

Tons of hideous freaks can get laid. In most of the western world, involuntary virginity suggests severe personality flaws.

File: 1501864187368.png (105KB, 954x1157px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 954x1157px

>all of the autistic shrieking coming from /r/socialism and /leftypol/

Glorious. Truly glorious

>>9858624
>Why take away these people's power/money and distribute it evenly?

>Waiting for my communist statebucks to come in the soviet mail system. I still have a boss but get a slice of my doctor's paycheck so it evens out.

This is a fifth-grade idea of communism. Will summer just not end?

>>9858627

>I already explained to you

Lol I guess we'll agree to disagree then. I don't buy your rather arbitrary assertion that a rejection of metanarratives MUST be a negative project when you can just as easily cast it in exactly equivalent positive terms.

>>9858635
I have no idea what the operational details of a Communist country entail because I don't live in one and never cared enough to learn. Can you attack my overarching point instead of the particulars?

>>9858632

It may or may not suggest a lot of fucking things, that's the point.

>>9858470
Again, he claimed that men and women on average have different personality traits and desire for high-status jobs.

>>9858632
>tons of hideous freaks get laid
This is the argument people who make fun of virgins use to justify their crass bullying. It's not nature's fault and the fact that you were born short and ugly, it's your own fault for being an awkward loser. Now I can make fun of you for something you can't change while still feeling morally superior.

>>9858632
Those "personality flaws" are often the result of someone's genes and upbringing. Being held responsible for not being socially adept is the same as being held responsible for being ugly.

>>9858643
The real reason is it because it limits human potential and self-realisation, not just because of being treated poorly.

>>9857986
So right-wing criticism of institutions means the right-wing are the Marxists now.

>>9858164
no

>>9858099
no

File: HegSoc.jpg (19KB, 225x316px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 225x316px

While the author is right, the transition wasn't so quick, though.

It went on more or less like this:

>Karl Marx: "the proletariat is the revolutionary class and they will overthrow capitalism and establish communism according to the scientific laws of historical materialism"
>Vladimir Lenin: "the proletariat is the revolutionary class but there is the need of a vanguard party to overthrow capitalism and bring communism"
>Gyorgy Lukacs and Antonio Gramsci: "the proletariat is the revolutionary class and they will overthrow capitalism once intellectuals imbue them with class consciousness"
>Herbert Marcuse: "the proletariat isn't the revolutionary class anymore, but the intellectuals can still imbue revolutionary class consciousness in other groups like blacks, gays, women and radical students so they overthrow capitalism"

And finally

>Ernesto Laclau: "there is no revolutionary class, only the revolutionary movement, that creates political coalitions at will according to its needs, the only thing it needs to care about is cultural hegemony"

>>9858638
>you can just as easily cast it in exactly equivalent positive terms.

But how does that constitute a metanarrative?

>>9858643
>Can you attack my overarching point instead of the particulars?

Communism is stateless and moneyless. These aren't "particulars." In communism you get what you produce. That's it.

>>9858601
So then surely you have a better explanation?

>>9858702
Yes

>>9858592
>because it is transcendent of factical existence
Sounds like a covert rephrasing of "it's outside my capacity to understand it." Especially given that you can't even point to anything that transcends existence. The notion is absurd.

>>9858484

Jesus commanded his followers to live in poverty; sell what they own and have no pretense of material authority or superiority over others. Wealthy exploiters are damned.

>>9858812

Yeah. Spartacus used his absolute ontological freedom to make decisions that led him to heroism. No one is born a hero or a coward but are so by heroic or cowardly actions.

>>9858840
>you can't even point to anything that transcends existence.

Geez, this is a lit board? Have you even read a summary of existentialist ontology?

>>9858860
>Geez, this is a lit board?
Sure is. Not everyone agrees with the notion. For example, you can find Nietzsche directly criticizing the notion of transcendence on more than one occasion. The word "supernatural" is an oxymoron.

>>9858547
Again, he never said women are bad at programming. He said men and women, on average, have differences in personality traits and in their desire for high-status jobs.

The point is their *desire* for programming jobs, not their ability. He proposed ways to make these jobs more appealing to women (on average..) e.g. by introducing more collaboration.

>>9858582
>The rest of his ancestry did not achieve a status that high because they just didn't have the correct balance.
Too little is known about Spartacus's family to make that type of judgement. If they didn't become slaves like him they could never lead a slave revolt like him.

>>9858419
>A private multinational corporation is "leftist"?
Clearly he's describing the moral and political prejudices underlying their corporate culture, not their function as an agent in a financial or political system.

>>9857906
Traditional values place realism at the center.

Capitalism is the tiger.

Ride it.

Or it eats you.

>>9858220
>>9858316
>>9858470
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy

>>9859068

ride this

*unzips*

>>9857843
aware brah

>>9859068
>Traditional values place realism at the center
No. Pragmatism, though.

>>9858810
What is stopping the State from buying overseas?

File: auteurs-4-romeroCarmack93.png (635KB, 725x725px) Image search: [Google]

635KB, 725x725px

>>9857843

I just read it and I think the mistake of this guy was writing too much.

He is right in one thing.
There are more men who are mathematicians, and more men who are programmers, because men and women have different brains.

This is the heart of the issue
"Currently, one in every 189 females and one in 42 males is diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)"

Before STEM became and meme, and popular, and hip, something people study because they want to make money, and they look up to Sillicon Valley CEOS and startups, those careers were only "naturally attractive" and enjoyable, for only a small subset of society, and that subset is overwhelmingly male for biological reasons.

There is no problem at all with women not being 50% of the employees in an internet services and software company. He wrote too much about too many things.

>>9857975

This is why homosexual men are the best writers.
They are women with the brain power of a man, in the same way that a Castratti was a singer who could hit the same notes as a Soprano but with the power of a man.

He better had posted it behind seven proxies.

>>9859444
he didn't, /pol/ already found out who he was

File: 1469922109884.png (699KB, 599x858px) Image search: [Google]

699KB, 599x858px

>>9857975
Women are more interested in feelings but they aren't better at managing them. I disagree that they are interested in aesthetics at all.

>>9857992
The whole paradigm is nothing more than a fever dream of social scientists looking to push an agenda.

>>9859158
>There are more men who are mathematicians, and more men who are programmers, because men and women have different brains.
To prove it, you'd need to create a society where women aren't discouraged from that shit since they learn to talk.

>There is no problem at all with women not being 50% of the employees in an internet services and software company.
Sure. The problem comes when the choice is made for them before.

>>9859581
>but they aren't better at managing them
How many women who couldn't control their feelings commit violence or rape compared to man? Though it's probably another learned thing.

>>9859581
>stock photos photos of cosmos and historical atrocities as a virtue signallers for le deep intellectual

cute

>>9857843
This is a truly idiotic statement, something you'd expect from /pol/ or a YouTube comment.

"Gender and race politics" are merely a tool used by the Capital to subvert any criticism on class struggle. Liberalism needs race mixed, genderless people because these are probably the best consumers you can have. People with no sense of class consciousness, identity or gender are people the Capital can easily manipulate.

Someone who really read Marx - not a SJW poser who wastes his money in Art school - would be definitely aware of that.

Peterson should stick to his field of expertise, he's clearly not a great thinker.

>>9859068
Try reading Evola instead of quoting him like a retard.

>>9859083
*takes off jacket*
Ahh, that's better.

>>9859567
Several Googlers used his real name on Twitter and several sources originally posted it without his name redacted. /pol/ didn't do anything.

>>9859646
>To prove it, you'd need to create a society where women aren't discouraged from that shit since they learn to talk.
I.e. our current society. The notion that girls are discouraged from STEM at an early age is completely absurd, evidenced by the fact that the more gender equal a culture is the more the workforce is polarized. Social constructionism is a conspiracy theory.

>>9859646
>How many women who couldn't control their feelings commit violence or rape compared to man? Though it's probably another learned thing.
It's hard to rape when you physically can't. And male aggression isn't learned, it's the result of a hormonal composition that encourages aggression. It's impossible to understand if you're not a man.

>>9860346
>I.e. our current society
Maybe for the girls who are starting with first grade right now, and even then they have much fewer female role models to look up to, so it'll probably take one more generation to achieve that.

>>9860351
Well, I am too lazy to look for the data but how many rapists actually work with pure physical force instead of weapons or drugs?

>male aggression isn't learned, it's the result of a hormonal composition that encourages aggression.
Obviously hormones play a huge part in physical aggression but males from certain cultures are much more aggressive than from others, especially when it comes to domestic violence. Look how violent crime massively went down in the West too. Of course there are also economical (and evolutionary)factors but denying that education also plays a huge role is silly. If you teach boys that violence is a viable conflict resolution method and encourage it, they are even more likely to use it. Not exactly shocking.

>>9860445
>Obviously hormones play a huge part in physical aggression but males from certain cultures are much more aggressive than from others
I'm talking about the emotions being elicited, while you're talking about what's being acted out. A tamed Western man feels as acutely as a savage third world wife-beater does. What makes the Western man different is that he's indoctrinated from birth to view the more savage parts of his own nature with fear and contempt, and to suppress those destructive emotions. That cultural indoctrination doesn't make those feelings disappear, it just sublimates them and turns them into neuroses.

Women are less likely to undergo that sort of emotional numbing because the way a woman's emotions manifest themselves is less obviously distructive. A woman crying hysterically isn't going to draw attention from police. A man beating someone is.

>>9860445
>Maybe for the girls who are starting with first grade right now, and even then they have much fewer female role models to look up to, so it'll probably take one more generation to achieve that.
This is how this always works. Men create a field of interest or hobby, and then once it's established women complain about not being included in what they had no hand in building.

I'm interested in language learning and acquisition. I had no role-models growing up, male or female, but the hobby of learning languages still interested me. I worked really fucking hard to learn English, Spanish, Latin, and some French. And when I went to a polyglot convention (a subculture I didn't know existed), the fact that most of attendees were men became a minor scandal. It doesn't matter that these men were completely self-taught and that's their subculture formed out of thin air. All that mattered was that women didn't attend, therefor sexism.

Women aren't interested in nerdy pursuits because they had friends growing up. Once upon a time the later-in-life success of being a mildly Asperger-y loner who messed around with computers was worth it. It payed off by having a well-paying job and people praise you for being smart. Now all those hours spent alone working while girls were making out with cute boys is just a manifestation of your male privilege. Fuck off.

>>9857956
What a fucking uppity faggot you are.

>>9860530
>while you're talking about what's being acted out.
Which is what counts in the end when we're talking about MANAGING emotions. Yes, women have a biological advantage but a man who didn't grew up in some backwards shithole, won't be doing too bad at it either.

>>9860576
>This is how this always works.
You mean through centuries when woman were suppressed from following their interests and hobbies? Like, nigga, get some perspective. Even today some golf clubs ban bitches.

> I had no role-models growing up, male or female
Neither had I but our personal experiences are irrelevant for the big picture.

>I worked really fucking hard to learn English, Spanish, Latin, and some French.
Got any plans to move up from the baby mode, or do you speak something completely different natively?

>the fact that most of attendees were men became a minor scandal
Honestly sounds too stupid to be true, got any sauces?

>Women aren't interested in nerdy pursuits because they had friends growing up.
Right, because having a vagina guarantees that you have friends and there were no nerdy woman in the existence of mankind.

>Now all those hours spent alone working while girls were making out with cute boys is just a manifestation of your male privilege.
How did that even get into it? Besides, with cute boys, you added an extra group to the equation.

>>9857843
>Communism promised to be both morally and economically superior to capitalism
If he had read Marx he'd have known Marx never makes moral arguments against capitalism.

>>9860728
Communism isn't the same as Marxism. Many communists (even Engels if I remember correctly) have made moral arguments for it.

>>9860732
Those were the utopian socialists. Marx completely BTFO'd them though. Read The German Ideology and The Critique of The Gotha Program

>>9860735
And no communist since has made a moral argument for their system?

>>9860719
>Which is what counts in the end when we're talking about MANAGING emotions. Yes, women have a biological advantage but a man who didn't grew up in some backwards shithole, won't be doing too bad at it either.
This entire conversation started when some guy claimed that women are worse when it comes to managing emotions. You brought up higher crime rates among men as if the emotions that lead to violent crime are equally distributed among men and women. My point is that they're not. Crimes of passion are example of an inability to sublimate male emotions, while an inability to sublimate female emotions result in different outcomes. You're comparing apples and oranges.

And by the way, a man who grew up in a civilized society is doing worse. Because the state has a monopoly on violence, we are forced to control our emotions through force. It's not consensual.

>>9860719
>Even today some golf clubs ban bitches.
Oh fuck off. There are literally thousands of female-only clubs. It's the exclusively male ones that are being forced to integrate. Like I said, it's our party that they have to crash. They have no interest in building their own.

>Neither had I but our personal experiences are irrelevant for the big picture.
My point is that nerdy interests aren't the result of having role models who shared that interest, they're the result of an inherent interest in the subject. My niece didn't have to be taught to love animals, and my nephew didn't have to be taught to love building stuff. Neither had a role-model that lead them towards one path over the other.

>Got any plans to move up from the baby mode
How many languages are you fluent in btw?

>Right, because having a vagina guarantees that you have friends and there were no nerdy woman in the existence of mankind.
Generalities don't preclude exceptions. This is the problem with speaking to someone left-of-center. They care so much about avoiding stereotyping that they don't have an ability to speak in terms of averages. This is what this entire conversation is about. I think that there's an inherent average "femaleness" that's biologically instantiated and that results in different interests and fields of competence between men and women. You seem to agree, but you're so freighted of stereotyping that the exceptions are more important to you than they are to me.

>>9857843
charlatan analysis. historically and intellectually incorrect. peterson is not a political philosopher, he is a pundit commentator full of right wing bias. please ban peterson threads or make them go to /pol/ where they belong

>>9857843
The guy who wrote that memo is an idiot.

>>9860829
>full of right wing bias.
Name a contemporary academic whose work doesn't include left wing bias.

>>9857904

Yes, also oppressing people you don't like, those two core mechanics are pretty much all there is to it

the new left is not the old left and applications of Marxism to identity politics has always been a stretch

Can we stop this bullshit altogether and please get back to focusing on poverty and war?

I promise we can pick the conversation up at a later date but I'm so fucking sick of identity politics taking the central position in a political discourse that has become abstract, sanctimonious and self centered.

the Facebook generation is obsessed with manipulating presentations of the self, and this is the ultimate reason most young people get into politics in the first place. Mind you I think this template applies as much to the new conservatives as the so-called SJWs. For example, racial realists, conspiracy theorists, nationalists; all of whom constantly signal their identity by consistently disparaging a clownish version of the left. "See guys, I'm in the cool club! No phony leftist BS here!"

The bottom line is that the internet has allowed us to develop channels of thought and self-presentation that lead to unhealthy patterns of thinking.

GET OFF THE INTERNET

>>9858003
>>class-based analysis based on material conditions

The sjw left merely redefines "class", so that it is no longer purely economic. They are absolutely basing their argument on what they assert are material conditions, however.

Maybe you should try thinking rationally and impartially, instead of emotionally and sentimentally.

>>9860445
>Maybe for the girls who are starting with first grade right now,

Try girls starting first grade in the 80s.

>and even then they have much fewer female role models

Because they/(you) are biologically incapable of succeeding in these fields

File: NAZBOL ARGONAUTS.jpg (47KB, 1600x965px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 1600x965px

Didn't even finish reading lmao.

>>9858015
>God
Look! i'm retarded!

>>9858417
The "genetic fallacy" is not a fallacy. Certain types of people tend to make certain types of mistakes.

>>9858471
No homo ;)

>>9858220
Kek, spotted the woman.

>>9859646
Posts like this is how you know /lit/ is just /tumblr/.

>>9858316
>>9858470
>you have to be the strongest man in the world to get to say that women aren't as strong as men

>>9860763
>as if the emotions that lead to violent crime are equally distributed among men and women. My point is that they're not.
True ... but, the differences between cultures show us that man can easy improve when they don't live in a backwards society that rewards them for asocial behavior, and there is still a lot room to lower it further. So while biology sides against men, they are still doing much worse than they could.

>Because the state has a monopoly on violence, we are forced to control our emotions through force.
Even assuming something as simple as acting civil is too much to ask, there are fuckloads of legal and respected (as in good for the social status) ways to release aggression. You can even literally beat others up, in the ring.

>Because the state has a monopoly on violence, we are forced to control our emotions through force.
Usually as protection. Do golfers need protection from whales grabbing their asses?

>they're the result of an inherent interest in the subject.
That's way too fucking simplistic.

>My niece didn't have to be taught to love animals
She probably had positive experiences with them and encouragement. Ditto for the nephew.

>Neither had a role-model that lead them towards one path over the other.
So they grew up with people who hate animals and building stuff?

>How many languages are you fluent in btw?
Just four too, or well, five if you want to be overly anal and count Ukrainian separately from Russian. Never actively learned any sans Spanish since I had the rest from my environment, which is quite a downside tbqh. I'd love to learn French but I have no fucking idea where to start beyond jumping into the cold water and moving to France (something I want to do either way). Sure, there is stuff like DuoLingo but ehhhh. Had two years of Latin back in school too but now it's only sufficient to translate well known quotes.

>to speak in terms of averages.
That'd need some actual data comparing the amount of lonely males and females. AFAIK there is no data for kids, while the data for adults is not too conclusive, but if you got anything new, shoot.

>I think that there's an inherent average "femaleness" that's biologically instantiated and that results in different interests and fields of competence between men and women.
Well, sure, there are some inherent biological differences, which obviously make the person lean to certain interests and affect their competences. The age long question is how big it is compared to other factors.

>>9857843
>now the oppressor is the “white, straight, cis-gendered patriarchy.”

You could substitute this with ANY identity politics or, plainly put, "identity."
No one works to be white, brown, gay, etc. -they are things you're born with- and this conclusion is probably the most common misconstruction of this argument.

>>9858666
You adapt to the demands of your environment or you are a failure

>>9860991
>So while biology sides against men, they are still doing much worse than they could.
Here's a big secret that no one will ever talk about: men will always do worse. The female of any species is more biologically valuable than male is because they're a bottleneck for procreation. A woman is only fertile for 20-25 years of her life, and she can really only have a kid a year at most. So a woman's biological limit is 20 children, while a man's is nearly infinite. Because female fertility is scarce, they're more valuable to society and men have to compete for them. And one way men compete is by dominating other men through violence, taking control over more resources and more women. Men wouldn't fight wars if women didn't exist. This is also why men live shorter lives, are more likely to experience violence, and why no one cares about them unless they've accomplished something great.

>there are fuckloads of legal and respected (as in good for the social status) ways to release aggression
No, not really. Men will always have to control themselves more than women do. A woman becoming hysterical, speaking daggers, sleeping around, saying things she can never take back, and other examples of unhampered female emotions aren't discouraged to anywhere near the same extent that male emotional outbursts are. And with good reason. Violence is worse than emotional harm.

>Usually as protection.
I'm not disagreeing. I'm not arguing in favor of violence, i'm just speaking about the male emotional landscape and how it differs from women's.

>She probably had positive experiences with them and encouragement. Ditto for the nephew.
Week-old infants show behavioral differences between genders. Male infants are more likely to look at objects, and female infants are more likely to look at faces

>That'd need some actual data comparing the amount of lonely males and females.
There is data, but it doesn't matter because anything brought up will be dismissed as being culturally-imposed rather than biologically preferred.

>The age long question is how big it is compared to other factors.
What I don't get about you people is how do you account for gender differences among other sexually dimorphic animals? You can't really say that mating selection among tigers is culturally imparted. It's obviously evolution. If these sex differences exist among every other species of mammal, why would it suddenly not exist among humans? Culture doesn't erase evolved cognitive preferences.

Btw, are you a woman? I feel like a lot of this cultural debate is due to the fact that a woman isn't capable of experiencing male subjectivity and vice versa.

>>9861035
This is technically true, but it's ethically troublesome. We don't dismiss the physically disabled as genetic failures (even if they are) because that would be cruel. We help and empathize with them.

>>9861060
>>9860991

ugh, stop it both you. You think you're having an argument. You're wasting each other's time and crashing the thread.

go outside

>>9861069
Everyone here is concerned with the misinterpretation of postmodernism and its roots in Marxism, but the reason his rant became viral is because a "literally shaking" brigade of women started attacking it on twitter. So the debate about to what extent women are biologically and culturally influenced in their career choice is really the heart of this thread.

jesus christ, wtf is this thread. Go read a book. All of you.

>>9861069
>people tell me "Go outside"
>I went outside

Now what?

>>9857843
>the Marxist intellectuals transitioned from class warfare to gender and race politics.
gender and race politics aren't a marxist thing tho. First and second wave femenists weren't marxists and neither were abolitionists and de-segregationists.

>>9857843
It's not like people didn't feel alienated by some combination of white/straight/cis-gendered/patriarchy before Marxists made the transition. Right-wing theories of insidious Marxist infiltration give the Marxists vastly more credit than they deserve.

>>9860719
>>9860445
>>9859646
>>9860991
>>9861119
This video gives multiple reasons as to why biology is the reason men prefer technical fields and women don't.
https://vimeo.com/19707588

>>9857895
This but unironically

>>9861123
I already believe that biology probably plays a role, so I don't need any convincing in that regard. It annoys me that 90% of the people who see through the left-wing bullshit just fall for the right-wing and the alt-right bullshit. For example, the alt-right is just as much of a totalizing victim complex narrative of reality as the left-wing. Instead of the 1% white cis scum, it's scheming globalist Jews. Basically same psychological mechanism. I'm profoundly sick of both these fucking cults.

>>9861119
>Right-wing theories of insidious Marxist infiltration give the Marxists vastly more credit than they deserve.

More people need to read Unqualified Reservations. It gives the right perspective to this sort of thing.

>>9861128
>I'm profoundly sick of both these fucking cults.

Someone else decided that for you.

>>9861133
> The United States is COMMUNIST

no..no he's retarded

>>9861152
You're retarded. Never post here again.

>>9861128
The problem is that left wing retardation is the primary prism through which academics and HR departments view the world. While /pol/ Nazi LARPing is relegated a few losers no one comes into real life contact with.

>>9861154
I post where I want cuckboi

>>9861159
YouTube is filled to the brim with shit that caters to /pol/

Btw It's unsurprising that academia and HR departments favours the centre left in liberal arts since the centre right is mostly libertarian economic autism and mild Christianity while the far right is full on stupid conspiratorial genocidal racial victim shit

>>9861173
>YouTube is filled to the brim with shit that caters to /pol/

/pol/ hates YouTube. You're an idiot.

>>9861176
> hates YouTube
> Filled with YouTube e-celeb threads

>>9861173
Yep. It seems that every YouTube video that touches in even the remotest way on WW2, Hitler, the economy, or Jews, and many that don't, ends up full of stormtards. There are more of the fuckers than I care for.

>>9861173
>YouTube is filled to the brim with shit that caters to /pol/
Yeah, Ben Shapiro and Joe Rogan. The actual Alt-right shit barely gets more than 10,000 views. There's a huge distinction between conservatism and fascism.

>favours the centre left in liberal arts since the centre right is mostly libertarian economic autism and mild Christianity
Politics isn't a team sport. The right being annoying doesn't excuse lies from the left.

>>9861200
>>9861201
>YouTube ecelebs
>the majority of tenured academia

Nice fair comparison.

>>9861200
I should explain... I mean the comment sections, not the videos themselves

>>9861207
That's a false comparison, though. The right comparison would be between stormtards and hardcore Stalin-loving tankies, and most tenured academics, while they might be leftist, are not tankies.

>>9861213
One person ITT argued that YouTube is filled with alt-right ecelebs, and that therefore it's fair that academia is filled with leftists.

>>9861201
infowars, Molyneux, all the MGTOW shit, Varg, Styx, Lauren Southern, Rebel Media, Black Pigeon all the conspiracy shit etc
> Politics isn't a team sport
It is tho

>>9861217
> why doesn't academia and society give a fair platform to people who want to gas the Jews
Hmmm..

>>9861229
What's the point of even talking, then?

>>9861229
Saying that women and men are different means that you want to gas the Jews. And saying that economic inequality is a problem means that you're a communist who wants to collectivize the grain and shoot all the kulaks.

>>9861240
> excuse me Sir and Madame but would you care to spare a moment of your time to listen to a presentation about gassing the kikes and sending the niggers back to Africa?

>>9857843

I wouldn't say Communism was always an economic failure, central planning allowed some countries like China and Vietnam to modernise their economies far more quickly than comparable capitalist nations in the same region.

>>9861220
You're lumping a whole bunch of right-of-center people with distinct views together. The CEO or rebel media is a Jew, and MGTOW is more concerned with feminism than with Jew baiting. You're caricaturing the other side

>>9861251
> saying women and men are different
They don't stop there they then claim that most women are whores or manipulated by Jews and then sell a system for neets to fuck women based on trickery and then go on about white sharia and how women should not be allowed to vote

>>9861263
Isn't it funny how people who don't go on /pol/, and people who do, have such different ideas of what /pol/ even is?

>>9861266
The right, like the left, exist on a spectrum with different levels of intensity. Just like extreme communism doesn't invalidate left wing economics as a whole, hardcore misogyny doesn't invalidate right wing notions of inherent gender roles

>>9861266
>sell a system for neets to fuck women based on trickery

God forbid our precious women have their honor besmirched by NEET semen. What a tragedy.

>>9861290
Implying the system works

>>9861274
4pol is a Trump fanclub from across the right wing political spectrum. 8pol is a national socialist Trump fanclub

>>9861066
Because we are developed enough ethically to value them as individuals and treat them with as much dignity and respect as possible (hypothetically)
However, at some level people do still need to adapt to their environment, or else our social structures will fall apart and the humans will go extinct

>>9861295
Then why would women care?

>>9857843
Yeah, It sucked in the early 90s when they first invented racism and sexism

>>9861318
Do they? I haven't met anyone outside the internet who ever heard of Cernovich or RooshV or MGTOW's in general

>>9861295
Not saying it does. But the idea that women would make bad decisions with men, o noooooooooo.

>>9861324
>But the idea that women would make bad decisions with men, o noooooooooo
what do you mean?

>>9861316
The adaption will occur regardless. All i'm saying is that shitting on the people who are unable to adapt is a good way to make the problem worse by making those people feel resentful. /r9k/'s misogyny is the result of a culture that puts sex in front of them as often as it can, and then calls the men who are unable to participate in it losers. These social conditions fill one with so much shame and feelings of alienation that enervated misogyny is how they cope.

>>9861339
You seemed positively horrified at the idea of NEETS having sex with women.

>>9861351
> horrified
No I mean that it they are professional snake oil salesmen who target vulnerable people and milk money out of them without helping them at all and usually making things worse

>>9861362
>usually making things worse

Explain how.

>>9861035
Thats slave thinking desu, "failure" is entirely relative.

>>9861368
look at people who do it professionally like Roosh and Forney they are childless faggots who have internalized a worldview that women are whores who are out to get them and that they should be used for sex and marriage should be avoided at all costs. Even the founder of the pick up artist "game" phenomnenon even wrote a book later how it was all bullshit
https://www.amazon.com/Truth-Uncomfortable-Book-About-Relationships/dp/B016E6EWHK

>>9861386
>Neil Strauss
>"the founder"

Where do you get your information? Salon?

>>9861386
Marriage is bullshit if you're a guy. What advantages does it confer? If you're a woman it's a ticket to compelling another man to pay for you even if you get divorced. A woman can cheat on her husband, take his kids, and make the state force her ex give her half of his income on top of a monthly check to help raise the children he isn't able to see whenever he wants. What the fuck does a guy get when he gets married? Nothing. It's a self-imposed prison sentence.

Marriage was destroyed in the 70s.

>>9861386
You do realize that even feminists call marriage bullshit, right? This is something everyone agrees with.

>>9861408
>>9861403
>marriage is dead
> marriage is bullshit
what seems to be the problem then?

>>9861403
>advantages
Fuck off back to r9gay

Stop obsessing with old hags, they were never worth marrying. Old hag means over 15, by the way.

>>9861403
>>9861408

I've never head a child say that marriage is bullshit. Almost always children and former children say growing up outside a marriage is bullshit.

>>9861412
You're the one who complained about the pick up artists disparaging marriage.

>>9861417
I'm saying they are shit people who can't get married and can't hold relationships

>>9861415
Yep. Parents werent married, dad was the kind to sleep around.

I'm 100% positive that most people should just castrate themselves and not even think about having a family if all they care about is sex. Leave marriage and rearing the next generation to those with the maturity for it.

>>9861415
>children

The opinions of subhumans who count as property do not change the fact that marriage is bullshit.

>>9861415
If you're a woman marriage is an insurance policy you take out before you have children. Even if your husband abandons you, you won't starve because the state can force the man to pay for you and the children you had with him. Of course from that perspective marriage is useful. But i'm speaking from the perspective of a man. not from the perspective of a woman or her children. I don't think a man should have to take that risk. And the current preponderance of single motherhood is what you get when most men realize this.

>>9861421
People who don't get married or have children are usually rich urbanites. They're not shit people. They're normal feminists and professional men.

>>9861439
>. And the current preponderance of single motherhood is what you get when most men realize this.

It's more like stupid people make stupid decisions they can't possibly afford, then one party wigs out.

>>9861423
You're mother chose him because he had the type of looks and personality that allowed him to sleep around, not despite that. Women select for cheating, not against it.

>>9861449
>It's more like stupid people make stupid decisions
>people are just dumb, analyzing trends is worthless!

>>9861123
Biology is an ideology, not a reason.

>>9861458
I'm all for personal responsibility. If you dont adequetly prepare to avoid these situations, then you should just not participate.

>>9861462
>Biology is an ideology

W E W

L
A
D

>>9861457
yawn

>>9861449
I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that men can be forced to pay for children they didn't want to have so women have no incentive to be loyal. Or the fact that they choose to sleep with studs who have tons of options rather than the stable guy. Or the fact that feminists keep telling them that marriage is oppressive (even though it only benefits them).

>>9861444
Feminists and professionals, and urbanites in general, are absolute trash. Scum of the Bourgeoisie. Pretentious fuckwads with their own heads up their asses and their dicks in their mouths and their foot in their nose.

>>9861467
BIOLOGY ISNT AN IDEOLOGY BECAUSE SOMEBODY SED SO

>>9861472
Go to bed Foucault

>>9861469
We can sit around and blame women for men's problems, but it ultimately comes down to two irresponsible people not managing their bodies or finances properly. We can say "oh society says such and such" but that removes the angle of personal accountability, which is the only thing that really matters for both sides.

As sexually active adults you should be very clear on what you want and expect of your partner and be financially and mentally capable of handling any mishaps. If you arent then tough shit buddy.

>>9861474
HAHAHA EPIN
Stop obsessing over old hags, r9gaylord.

>>9861481
You say that as if healthy relations between the sexes are the norm rather than the exception.

>>9861481
Here's the problem: if you had sex with a woman once in a drunken stupor and it lead to pregnancy, the state can force your to pay for the resulting child or you'll lose your freedom and your livelihood. The men are held supremely responsible, while a woman can get as many abortions as she wants. Men bear half of the responsibility, with none of the freedom.

>>9861501
Why are you stupid enough to have sex in a drunken stupor when you have no control? Are you fucking serious?

>>9861491
I'm well aware most relationships are bullshit, thats why I say what I say.

>>9861506
>Why are you stupid enough to have sex in a drunken stupor when you have no control?
Yeah, it's not like we live in a culture that encourages that at every corner. It's like every movie, song, contemporary book, and social media app is centered around the idea of casual sex.

Do you happen to live on mars?

>>9861510
>Yeah, it's not like we live in a culture that encourages that at every corner. It's like every movie, song, contemporary book, and social media app is centered around the idea of casual sex.
And why do you feel the need to do the same stupid shit everyone else does? Do you not value personal freedom and deciding your own values? Or are you just another pitiful slave who wants Big Brother to make allowance for all your fuckups?

Get real buddy. This world was always a fucking jungle.

>>9861517
>Get real buddy. This world was always a fucking jungle.
Yeah, and we don't need the state making it worse by forcing alimony and child support payments. If a woman can't keep her legs closed, why should the guy who satisfied his natural biological urge to fuck her have to bear the costs of her mistake? No, fuck that. It's state oppression. Marriage is THE economic contract. That's it. Otherwise marriage serves no purpose for men.

>>9861529
>If a woman can't keep her legs closed, why should the guy who satisfied his natural biological urge to fuck her have to bear the costs of her mistake?

And it's not a woman's biological urge to have sex too? Do you know how stupid you sound?

And again, both parties are at fault. I know you just want men to remain impotent children with no accountability, but that's not how this works. I'm almost glad our stupid court systems eat guys like you alive. You dont fucking think.

>>9861543
There's a culture of casual sex that's encouraged by women and that everyone participates in. If a woman has the option of aborting a resulting fetus (which she does in most Western countries), then men should have the right to economically disown that child if he wasn't married to the woman at the time. But for some reason we aren't allowed to enjoy that culture of casual sex without that economic albatross hanging over our heads.

If you can't see that obvious double standard then you aren't being intellectually honest.

>>9861557
The amount of crying done by white men is truly pathetic.

>>9861572
I'm not white. Nice try though.

>>9861557

Wear. A. Fucking. Condom. Or. Don't. Have. 'Casual'. Sex. You. Silly. Little. Bitch.

>>9861557
For starters, forget what society says. This about you and what you decide to do with yourself.

If you make a kid with a woman and she decides to keep it, then you need to have a good long talk with her on how you are going to handle it - if you decide to not get married. If you run off into the sunset without word like so many losers then dont feel suprised when you're called to court. I'll laugh when they crucify you.

Or better yet just dont make any kids at all you stupid fuck, if all you care about is sex then use protection or snip your balls.

>>9861572
White men have degenerated at a faster rate than most of society and women don't want them quite justifiably . It's really an area that alt-right analysis leaves out because they are the worst offenders and the worst representatives of the white race in general . When pressed they claim they are victims of a vast conspiracy and that the world is out to get them

>>9861577
> I'm not white
get off of my /lit/.

>>9861582
Who the fuck wears a condom? Are you serious? I'd get laughed at wearing a condom around here.

>>9861587
It's the asymmetrical freedoms that bother me. A woman has complete control over her reproductive life at any moment. She can take the pill or get an abortion. A woman can even give up her already born child for adoption in every state. While a man has to bear the 18-year responsibility of a single 10 minute fuck session. We have to bear the responsibility in ways that women don't because "muh body muh choice!" Fuck you bitch, my wallet my choice. Don't get the state apparatus to point a gun at my head because you couldn't keep your legs closed.

>>9861628
A man can wear a condom and choose a partner he actually wants to commit to. Making kids you cant or dont want to take care of is the very height of irresponsibility and in my opinion completely revokes your status as a man, if yo ever were one to begin with.

>Who the fuck wears a condom? Are you serious? I'd get laughed at wearing a condom around here.

Yea, you're just a bitch. lol. Good luck out there.

>>9861656
>not a real man
>you're just a bitch
>you don't have to have sex!
Nice try with the shaming tactics. I'm not insecure enough in my masculinity to care.

I'll break down the issue so that even someone with your IQ can understand:

>I'm a woman
>I had casual sex, which is encouraged in our culture
>I can take birth control
>I can take the morning after pill
>I can get an abortion
>I can give my child up for adoption whenever I want
>I can get the man to pay for raising the child

>I'm a man
>I had sex with a girl who said she was was on the pill
>now i'm responsible for giving a large portion of my income to a woman I had sex with once in a culture that encourages casual sex

Does the above seem equal to you?

>>9861684
>>I had sex with a girl who said she was was on the pill
>not wearing a condom to protect YOURSELF

god you're too stupid for this.

>>9861628
>Who the fuck wears a condom?

Men that don't want children or STIs, you dumb fuck. You're still gesturing toward societal pressures dictating your behavior, as if you were a slave to external sentiment, unable to control either is own thoughts or his own actions.

>>9861572
Literally all you ball-less lefties know how to do is cry. You're not Che Guevara, you and your ilk are a bunch of wusses who cry, stamp and whine until people cave into you. Even when you try getting aggressive (like Antifa) you only succeed when you gang up and surprise someone. What you cannibalizing morons don't have is a national, racial or cultural identity. To you, all of those things are "spooks" or "social constructs". There is no pride with you weaklings, just self-hatred. You hate your whiteness so you self-flaggelate yourself, you hate your gender so you go by "Xer" or whatever and pussy out for women. You project your hatred onto white men because you were taught that made you good. You say it's crying when white men want to preserve the society created by their ancestors while watching you green haired gangly jokers tear things down trough infiltration and mass-whining, yet you realize nothing, nor why people think this way. You're not some Soviet conscript fighting to liberate his home, hell even if you're a trust fund kiddie with no job you're no Marx, just a self-hating shrimp.
>>9861606
>Women don't want white men
Nigger what are you on? They don't want noddle-armed bitch boys like you, dating app data and hell, leaving your basement once in a while proves you otherwise: white men are considered the most desirable by women. As for the opposite, it's typically Asian or white women are most desirable. White-knighting for women won't get you laid, m8.

>>9861697
If you wear a condom fucking a fleshlight feels better. Girls don't like it either.

My point is that the issue of single motherhood and marriage would be resolved if you stopped giving these women a free meal ticket. Marriage was dissolved and monogamy debunked because of male checks. Whether it be through welfare or child support.

>>9861728
I hope you're a woman. A man saying this is almost too pathetic to bear.

>>9861606
>all surveys show that white men are the most wanted men by race
>women don't want them
Back to /tv/ to cuckpost fucking dumb cocksucker.

>>9861762
> app survey
lmao only 10% of men using that app will get laid faggot.

>>9861762
Explain the divorce rates the declining white population the growing number of perpetually low income and unemployed part timer men who will never own a house or pay off the student loans

>>9861778
Yeah, but butthurt leftist cuck posters and jewish porn fetish tropes are far more accurate about what women are attracted to?
>>9861790
Are you stupid? Do you seriously think that confirms the "ayo wyatt boi kangz be stealin' yo wimmen" meme butthurt niggers and b8ing leftists spam 4chan with?

>>9861790
I hate the alt right, but the one thing they're correct about is that Western decadence is the result of the breakdown of traditional forms of identity. If you have no identity (national, racial, or religious), you're a single atomic individual in the middle of a group of atomic individuals who can never truly care about you. If that's the case, why care about anything? Individualism is inherently alienating.

>>9861830
You idiot I'm saying males in the west have become weak and degenerate you and the other cuck were happy that white women in the west still want to fuck white men which isn't a fucking accomplishment less men are meeting the standard of men in the past for marriage job security skills and character

>>9857959
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Marxism
"One idea that many "branches" of Neo-Marxism share is the desire to move away from the idea of open, bloody revolution to one of a more peaceful nature. Moving away from the violence of the Red revolutions of the past while keeping the revolutionary message. Neo-Marxist concepts can also follow an economic theory that attempts to move away from the traditional accusations of class warfare and create new economic theory models, such as Hans-Jürgen Krahl did.
Several important advances to Neo-Marxism came after World War I from Georg Lukács, Karl Korsch and Antonio Gramsci. From the Institute for Social Research founded in 1923 at the University of Frankfurt am Main grew one of the most important schools of neo-Marxist interdisciplinary social theory, The Frankfurt School. Its founders were Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno whose critical theories had great influence on Marxist theory especially after their exile to New York (Columbia University) after the rise of fascism in Germany in 1933."
so inother words, it is exactly what peterson has been saying.

>>9859068
This. Follow the example of the Meiji Restoration

>>9857843

the writer of this just got fired by Google

>>9857904
Have you read the communist manifesto?

>>9863067
Good. White males that continuously whine about stuff like this are pathetic.