Should poptimists be executed?

yes
rockists too

No, that'd be too kind.

>>74387095
viva the junglists

File: grimes-onset_nlzdxd.jpg (926KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

926KB, 2048x1152px

>>74387085
>he hasn't grown out of his "pop is bad" phase
I remember being twelve too

only bleeps truly matter

>>74387206
is not phase, is a reality. I used to think pop was band then I had my poptimism phase until I realise I was wrong, there is no value in crappy overproduced pop like Beyonce, Taylor and other normie idols, you have the taste of a 15 yrs girl

>>74387206
>grimesfag
of course this 'thing' would try and have a say in pop music.

>>74387498
>>74387206
Bad pop: Grimes, CHVRCHES, Sufjan Stevens, Vampire Weekend, Katy Perry, Beyonce

Good pop: Justin Timberlake, (new) Taylor Swift, Avril Lavigne [selected singles], Outkast, Lil Uzi Vert, R. Kelly

Why is this so hard for people ?

>>74388119
Agree with all the bad pop opinions but how the fuck is lil uzi vert good pop?

>>74388391
https://youtu.be/VcyFfcJbyeM

>>74388436
This version's better https://youtu.be/Zgmvg-zzctI

>>74388558
Indeed, I posted mine for the lyrics.

>>74388436
i hate the hook on this song especially the "i dont really care if you cryyyy", the way he sings sounds so irritating to me

>>74388863
"All my friends are dead" is the catchiest hook of 2017 and I have yet to hear otherwise.

>>74387225
This but modern pop is highest quality bleeps

>>74388889
have you listened to the leaked ariel pink album?

>>74389042
I was never a fan.

>>74389071
too bad cause there are plenty of catchy hooks on the new album

>>74389071
Oh, that might explain your plebness

>>74389143
I'm willing to listen if there's a video somewhere, just can't torrent currently.

>>74389348
My taste is immaculate.

>>74389382
>My taste is immaculate.
prove it

File: 2017_7_31.png (3MB, 1820x3500px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1820x3500px

>>74389455

>>74389552
Not bad but clearly not immaculate

>>74388119
How tf is Sufjan Stevens pop

>>74389584
>Not bad
correct
>not immaculate
incorrect

>>74389602
are you being serious ?

>>74389623
Age of Adz is pop, sure. But Illinois, Carrie & Lowell, Seven Swans, Michigan, etc, sure the fuck aren't. Not in the same way that Chvrches, Grimes, Vampire Weekend, and Katy Perry are

>>74389693
http://www.allmusic.com/album/illinoise-mw0000372949
https://rateyourmusic.com/release/album/sufjan-stevens/illinois-3/

How tf is Sufjan Stevens bad pop

Pop != popular music

File: aristotle-9188415-1-402[3].jpg (258KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 1200x1200px

>>74389946
>popular music != popular music

File: standard_trotskij_lev.jpg (60KB, 300x414px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 300x414px

>>74390609
>The Aristotelian logic of the simple syllogism starts from the proposition that ‘A’ is equal to ‘A’. This postulate is accepted as an axiom for a multitude of practical human actions and elementary generalisations. But in reality ‘A’ is not equal to ‘A’. This is easy to prove if we observe these two letters under a lens—they are quite different from each other. But, one can object, the question is not of the size or the form of the letters, since they are only symbols for equal quantities, for instance, a pound of sugar. The objection is beside the point; in reality a pound of sugar is never equal to a pound of sugar—a more delicate scale always discloses a difference. Again one can object: but a pound of sugar is equal to itself. Neither is this true—all bodies change uninterruptedly in size, weight, colour, etc. They are never equal to themselves. A sophist will respond that a pound of sugar is equal to itself “at any given moment”.

>Aside from the extremely dubious practical value of this “axiom”, it does not withstand theoretical criticism either. How should we really conceive the word “moment”? If it is an infinitesimal interval of time, then a pound of sugar is subjected during the course of that “moment” to inevitable changes. Or is the “moment” a purely mathematical abstraction, that is, a zero of time? But everything exists in time; and existence itself is an uninterrupted process of transformation; time is consequently a fundamental element of existence. Thus the axiom ‘A’ is equal to ‘A’ signifies that a thing is equal to itself if it does not change, that is, if it does not exist.

>>74392268
>literally repeating the arguments from the sophists
did trotsky even read aristotle?

Yes, but not a quick execution. First, round them up and their children. Exterminate the offsprings in front of their eyes, and disintegrate the bodies in a tub of acid. After they are done weeping and excepting their fate. Blast the hardest metal the world has got to offer and do so while slowly ripping off their genitals. After that is done, you cut off their limbs, tie the libs as a makeshift rope, and ring them up. Before the hanging can take place, cover them in petrol and light them on fire for a good minute.