(((critical theory))) / (((frankfurt school)))

File: frankfurt2867.jpg (507KB, 1608x1600px) Image search: [Google]

507KB, 1608x1600px

bump

File: 1504212000894.jpg (232KB, 1000x1167px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 1000x1167px

>>139846115
>Is it just pseudointellectual antiwhiteness?
I have no doubt that these men were very intelligent, but I also imagine that their writing consists largely of stereotypically Jewish "oy vey goy I'm going to construct this elaborate intellectual framework and structure whose construction essentially doesn't permit criticism of its premises, and if you try to construct a counter-argument outside the context of the framework that I've developed I'm going to insist that you're merely denying the Truth which I've established therein so basically I can never be wrong so long as I coopt the centers of authority which would ultimately be responsible for passing judgment on whether what I've constructed is fundamentally valid", i.e. "I built a philosophy where I'm always right and took control of the institutions whose job it is to analyze whether a given philosophy is valid or not". Which is what we observe today, there's a million reasons why (((Critical Theory))) is Semitic nonsense but so long as (((institutions))) keep saying "oh no sorry this is the valid philosophy to have, go fuck yourself", it's impossible to deconstruct because it's internal structure doesn't permit its invalidation within the context of its own logic.

File: sjw6068.jpg (24KB, 480x284px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 480x284px

>>139847268
>I have no doubt that these men were very intelligent, but I also imagine that their writing consists largely of stereotypically Jewish "oy vey goy I'm going to construct this elaborate intellectual framework...

both of what you said is true. the circularity of (((critical theory))) is pretty visible when you talk with defenders of (((critical theory))). The goy leftists you internalized it always stick to goalpost switching by the good old (((semantical relativity))) arguement .

File: 1504106037609.jpg (36KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 480x640px

>>139847268
Another very Jewish aspect of it is the fact that it's so arcane and wordy and impenetrable that it requires a shitload of effort to even get to a point where you can criticize it in a classically academic way, and if you even get to that point there's infinity ways that your argument can be "invalidated" via word games and semantics and misdirections and other such "not really addressing the argument" ways. This is a reflection of the Jewish Talmudic tradition of rabbis going back and forth for literal thousands of years going "oy vey but did you see this other paragraph at the other end of this corpus of 6 gorillion pages of material? When you consider that we can't really accept the conclusion that you've arrived at until we deal with..." and then it goes on and on in circle forever until one side gets tired and stops trying (protip, that was us, because the Jews are neurotic bookworms willing to spend their entire life reading a trillion pages of nonsense in service of whatever goal they're pursuing, which is why they make good lawyers). It's the equivalent of when some liberal / SJW / troll comes on 4chan and responds to your arguments by deflecting and going "but you can't prove that that's true!" and basically doing anything other than actually addressing whatever the argument at hand is, just deflecting and misrepresenting endlessly until you throw up your hands in frustration. That's literally what happened in real life.

>>139846115
>critical theory
It's just a way to attack society.

For example the gasoline engine is invented. This brings transportation, economic growth, prosperity, increased supply of food to billions of people. A wonderful thing for the progress of humanity.

Instead, critical theory creates groups of "intelligentsia" and subversive agents that create pseudo-science to thwart and outright destroy this progress. They invent things like global warming to demoralize the people and to undermine society. This is the "critical" part, it is a theory that no matter the virtue within a society you can outright invent a fake weakness and attack it relentlessly until people become demoralized and open to subversion.

File: frankfurt school authoritarian personality 1415882051819.png (173KB, 1668x1356px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 1668x1356px

>>139847878
>Another very Jewish aspect of it is the fact that it's so arcane and wordy and impenetrable that it requires a shitload of effort to even get to a point where you can criticize it in a classically academic way,

THIS!!!

Remember Fromm? The guy wrote like 50 books, all shite written in the style of Žižeks speeches. The sad things is that his ideas were pretty simple basic bitch ranting about how certain things dont work in the West. Literall high school level intellectualism.

Same goes for the rest of (((psychoanalysis writers))).

Basically saying smth you have to read between the line but its hard to point what it actually is.

>>139848003
>Instead, critical theory creates groups of "intelligentsia" and subversive agents that create pseudo-science to thwart and outright destroy this progress. They invent things like global warming to demoralize the people and to undermine society.

they actually do it far more sublte than that, for instance theyll use half truths more often than straigh up lies:

"gasoline engine created an alienated bourgaisse class that dissmissed authentic well being of itself..."

basically a lot of weaselish nonsense aim at demoralization, pic rel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJmEMeY6KVs

File: culture_kmac.jpg (10KB, 200x300px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 200x300px

bump

>>139847878
BRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPP

>>139847268
>I imagine
Here's the problem with the Frankfurt conspiracy theory: no one spreading the memes has read a single text. One of the most cited texts in the (((you)))tube videos spreading this nonsense is completely misunderstood. This is easily proven by anyone reading the first paragraph,

"Conversely, what is proclaimed and practiced as tolerance today, is in many of its most effective manifestations serving the cause of oppression."

It doesn't get clearer than this, but as a further proof one can look to Marcuse's theory of 'repressive desublimation', which is quite similar to the idea of control in "Brave New World". That which appears to be a rebellious act or a theft of freedom from the state can be a deepening of subjugation and slave ideology. The objects of freedom become the new objects of domination because capitalism has no code of ethics, no core values of its own.

This is part of the reason for the complexity and uncertainty in their writings. They were trying to figure out this fluid form of ethics (or non-ethics), and for all the annoyances of post-modern theory (which came after them) it is in some way understandable because our words and thinking do not adequately represent a world that is so destructive and rapidly changing.

Notice how /pol/ (and the Alt-Right) had an embrace of all things chaotic and degenerate, this is a similar sort of language to post-modernity. And then notice how both have come to embrace the rebellious aspects of tradition: marriage, outdated political forms, self-discipline, etc.

Is it an accident that an heir to the Frankfurt School promotes all of these same things? Slavoj Zizek is as opposed to political correctness as anyone here, and he discusses how heterosexual relationships have become the true rebellious act.

It is no accident, there was major crossover between German conservative thinkers and the Frankfurt School, and the latter were a major influence on the New Right.
cont'd

>>139852194
cont'd
The Frankfurt School has more in common with the Alt-Right than they do with SJWs, and the SJWs have more in common with liberals and conservatives than they do with the Frankfurt School. Remember, it was not communists who introduced these ideas of identitarian equality and destruction of heritage, it was the United States Government. The CIA introduced the anti-German movement as a way to undermine Right-Wing thought and prevent any true communist movement.

Has nothing to do with a Jewish conspiracy (unless you believe the CIA are all Jews).

>>139852194
>This is part of the reason for the complexity and uncertainty in their writings. They were trying to figure out this fluid form of ethics (or non-ethics), and for all the annoyances of post-modern theory (which came after them) it is in some way understandable because our words and thinking do not adequately represent a world that is so destructive and rapidly changing.

this bobblydygook is a good example of the academic leftspeak started by Frankfurt school.
>>139852652
>Remember, it was not communists who introduced these ideas of identitarian equality and destruction of heritage

This is bs. Marcusa was anti-patrirchy, look at his Eros and Civ or whatever it was called. Guy literally created id politics with Angela Davis. His exchange with Heidegger is also telling about his western values being just lip service.

Franfurt school = academic SJWs

>>139852194
>Here's the problem with the Frankfurt conspiracy theory: no one spreading the memes has read a single text.

adress this pic rel >>139848838 first

>Slavoj Zizek is as opposed to political correctness as anyone here, and he discusses how heterosexual relationships have become the true rebellious act.

on lip service basics, meanwhile he is straigh up lefty on all things

>>139853036
Nonsense. You can find worse 'gobbledygook' coming from liberal thinkers. Wittgenstein is far worse nonsense than the Frankfurt School, and in the end it says nothing.

You didn't argue anything at all here. Did the Frankfurt School introduce Denazification and use the CIA to detrain people from their right-wing thought? No. it was the US government.

I have no doubts that they are Leftists, but you are fool if you think that they have anything in common with the current crop of SJWs.

Use arguments, please.

>>139853598
Why should I address this when you refuse to address any of the arguments I proposed, not to mention a very significant quote which undermines your whole position. Here, I'll post it again:
"Conversely, what is proclaimed and practiced as tolerance today, is in many of its most effective manifestations serving the cause of oppression."

But in any case, the first part of the image says nothing significant, it is simply stating that anti-semitism resides within the individual espousing the beliefs. Which is, for the most part, true. Very few of the populist groups could give a reasoned critique of Jewish ideology and theology, they merely have reactions - which are emotional. It is absurd to think that an academic study of fascism a few years after National Socialism would discuss Judaism as a major factor.

Is their study effectively wrong? I think so. Is this a sign of a major conspiracy to undermine white America? No.

As for the second quote, it is questionable, however they may have been just trying to limit outliers rather than attack white people. For example, blacks and Asians may have differing reasons for anti-semitism, so their positions could skew results. Is it questionable? Yes. Is it a sign of ethnic warfare? No, or at least it is extremely weak evidence.

Zizek is probably more critical of the SJWs than most people on the Right. He tries to address some of the causes, where most of the Alt-Right is nothing more than emotional reaction ant counter-identitarianism. Left and Right is irrelevant if the core problems are not addressed. You will never get an right answer if you ask the wrong questions. And so you can never build a good society upon ideas which never seek the good.

I don't agree with Zizek, and an argument could be made that false solutions and a misunderstanding of foundational problems can be worse, but I don't know that could ever be proven.

File: froge78358.jpg (90KB, 957x621px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 957x621px

>>139854124
>I have no doubts that they are Leftists, but you are fool if you think that they have anything in common with the current crop of SJWs.

they literally trained the SJWs like Angela Davis.

Literall. Cultural Marxism was introduced the most in Eros and Civilization in which Marxism is translated into sexual element of culture via Freuds theory. LGBT is Marcusas ideological child.

Sure, you can weasel it out due to nature of the academic žižekspeak/leftspeak. But Ill you concretly, was Authoritarian personality a legit book by scientifc standards?

>>139855883
>"Conversely, what is proclaimed and practiced as tolerance today, is in many of its most effective manifestations serving the cause of oppression."

I adressed it - LIP SERVICE. Marcusa campaigne like a SJW faggot that he was to remove Heidegger from teachng position.

>As for the second quote, it is questionable, however they may have been just trying to limit outliers rather than attack white people.

sure they did...that is why we have antiwhite discrimination and BLM.

in other words:
WHAT IS THE THEORY OF (((CRITICAL THEORY)))? IS THERE EVEN A HYPOTHESIS? THERE IS NONE. ITS JUST ANTIWHITENESS MASKED IN PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC BOBBLYDYGOOD.

File: Marcuse.png (805KB, 1386x842px) Image search: [Google]

805KB, 1386x842px

>>139855883
>"Conversely, what is proclaimed and practiced as tolerance today, is in many of its most effective manifestations serving the cause of oppression."

Here are two quotes from Marcuse in which he says basically the same thing, and explicitly gives hypocritical power to censor and control to one side of the political spectrum. He did not hide it, and it perfectly explains what's going on right now. You're right, people who cite the FS need to actually read more of it.

Anyone who wishes to claim that the FS is not loxist or anti-Christian should do their best not to claim that anyone who counter-criticizes the FS is anti-semitic at their individual core. It's basic hypocrisy to take it there, and when things are taken there over, and over, and over again as an argumentative leveraging move, surprise should not register when the target finally learns the tactic.

Projection is a helluva drug.

To me, the telling observation is the inherently DEconstructive nature of the criticism. Almost by definition, it is antithetical to CONSTRUCTIVE criticism. It does not appear to be intended to help.

And if we look at the large-scale machinations supported by its theorizing, we see that if it was originally intended to remove oppression as an obstacle to individual liberty, it is indeed rapidly becoming that which it once sought to unseat. It is now the oppressor.

Nobody is sanely worried that a ragtag group of outcast rednecks is going to suddenly seize control of finance, media, academia, law, etc.