Who /leftylit/ here
>criticizes American politics
>calls the book "democracy"
>doesn't understand that this makes him part of the problem
>"reeeeee I was ironic" -Noam Chomsky
>"irony is the song of a bird that has come to love its cage" -David Foster Wallace, citing someone
I rest my case.
>Noam Memesky
Try reading a real leftist first, not this anarcho-liberal hack
>>7985267
you're fucking retarded ;^)
>>7985273
haha irony
>>7985076
Read zizek
What books should I start with when I want to learn about environmentalism?
I'm probably leftylit but honestly I have no desire to read Chomsky, the man reeks of timid, sneering inaction.
>>7985076
Yo.
>>7985997
Lobbing bricks and bombs never win anyone over to the cause of anarchism or general leftism. The man is dry and mild mannered, but he's lived a rather loud life, marginalized by MSM as it has been.
>>7985964
What is his most accessible piece? Any?
>>7985267
Your stand up routine is stale >>>/dfw/
>>7986193
I'd read Mapping Ideology first, though it's not just about Zizek it should give a good background. After that, watch The Pervert's Guide to Ideology; then, you should read his masterpiece The Sublime Object of Ideology.
>>7986193
>marginalized by MSM as it has been
>marginalized by MSM
>Noam fucking Chomsky
Get a load of this retard.
Read Michael Hudson - Killing the Host he explains some of the background for income inequality.
For a mixture of Old Left and psychology Christopher Lasch
>>7986193
First as tragedy then as farce
>>7986193
But sometimes lobbing bricks and bombs (even if culturally, by creating revolutionary content) is what is needed.
Then again, I'm not that good at following my own advice but that's no reason to not look for this attitude in what I read or watch.
>13 posts and no pol shit post
I.. Is left lit finally back?
>>7986212
I first heard of this guy in my mid 20s and that was from a class I was taking. The media most ignores him and has tried to marginalize his voice. Unsuccessfully, considering the internet exposure has brought him back.
I am old, anon.
>>7986230
Yeah, we're being invaded by reddit again.
>>7986212
Has Chomsky been on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC much? He seems to be completely ignored by the mainstream American media.
>>7986252
Sorry, I mean more exposure.
>>7986252
it's the internet, famalam
ask people over 30, only intellectuals will be aware of him
>>7986227
The only thing that would accomplish in today's political climate is giving the right wing something to react to. It's easy as hell to demonize an ideology if its advocates use or advocate violence (take black lives matter, for example). That's not to say violence shouldn't ever be used, but only when there is no other option for those in need of change.
>>7986227
Culturally, sure. And there's a time and place for forceful action, but part of the reason communism and general revolutions don't happen in soft bougie and upper prole states is they don't really want violence on their doorsteps.
The powers-that-be use the violent anarchists, punker types, to paint the whole movement as just wanting to live in perpetual violent chaos
>>7986252
Have you heard of Sacco and Vanzetti?
>>7985271
this
>>7986193
Ily butterfly
>>7986243
>left
>>7986308
>>7985987
i would also like to know
>>7986479
jk
also does anyone have the addon that blocks trip users?
>>7986193
namefagging attention whore leave
your a dorable
>>7986282
Sacco and Vanzetti were guilty :^)
>>7985267
Kill yourself, dumbass.
>>7985964
Zizek is yet another obscurantist hack.
>>7986316
he's operating on 2008 info, haha poor polman 8 years late
What are some good leftist books advocating for authoritarianism?
What fiction and poetry do you read comrades?
Yesterday I read;
>Dubliners by James Joyce
>A Shropshire lad by A.E. Housman
>The Rainbow by D.H. Lawrence (haven't finished)
Also, have you found that your political beliefs influence the literature that you read?
>>7989593
>authoritarian >good >pick one
>>7985997
That is pretty much all anarchists
>>7989685
>any environmentalism that doesn't involve nuking the world's 500 most populated cities is feel-good
>>7989552
She's been here longer than you.
>>7986230
I wish.
I want the lefties and christfags back.
>>7989726
Much better than the emasculated pussy lala land bullshit the people on TV are selling you.
>>7989746
Did they leave? The Christfags and Marxists really made this board. I have noticed alot of frogposters and rednecks and right-wing Eurotrash suddenly popped up. I hope we didnt lose our good posters to /hist/
>>7989593
>leftist
>authoritarianism
>>7989576
/pol/tards call reddit left but are unaware of all the racist subs that were banned plus /r/the_donald and /r/european and all the right wing shit on defaults
>>7989779
I wouldn't even mind the invasion if those people actually read something that wasn't written to confirm their biases.
>>7985987
read up on Bookchin and Öcalan.
Every Leftist should skim Stirner's Unique One and Its Property and Die Deutsche Ideologie + Stirner's Critics, just to clear up the widespread misconceptions.
>>7989828
>it's a "we were always this bad, you're just a revisionist!" chapter
Sasuga /pol/tard
>>7989828
>originally
what year are you talking about when you say that? /lit/ wasn't particularly right in 2011/12 and that was before the apex of Christfags.
>not being a national socialist
pretty embarrassing famalam
marxism is so 20th century
>>7989855
So is national socialism.
>>7989779
A lot of them did leave for /his/ since the split. And in there place came the subhuman /pol/fags.
>>7989837
>>7989835
/lit/ is a board for elitist classisists.
/pol/ is mostly just racist libertarians and people who fetishize the reich without actually knowing all that much about it, not that there is anything wrong with being "racist", it's just that /pol/'s racism is too unsophisticated and unfocused.
>>7989855
Nazism only lasted like 10 years you cucklord.
>>7989878
Now see, this is a proper /lit/ tier nazi, most of /pol/ are nowhere near that level.
>>7989878
>literally
Take your identitarian ass back to tumblr
>>7989902
>not an argument
Oh, you're just a chucklefuck.
>>7989740
Just another example of woman narcissism then.
>>7989908
I just dont think there's a point addressing reddit-tier semantic arguments. Communication is rapidly changing, and will only accelerate on this path, so I don't understand why you wouldn't just accept the message as you perceive it.
>>7985271
Anon, could you give us an example?
>>7989828
/lit/ wasn't right wing at its inception, it was if anything radically left. One of the biggest early name fags was a transgender PhD student with a fixation on Isabelle Huppert.
About the most right it got was D&E being a bit obsessed with a kind of might makes right philosophy and I guess Quentin. And Ayn Rand shit posting.
>>7985271
He is just one of those people you want to punch, not because of his beliefs, but the way he speaks.
>>7989930
I think any rand was a secret left winger who wrote lots of stupid shit to make people dislike freedom/capitalism etc
>>7989930
It's not that /lit/ has radically changed but the goalposts have been moved by left-liberal anglos obcessed wtih individualism, universalism and progressivism. Mussilini was more socialist than any mainstream "leftist" politician today
>>7989779
The marxists probably went to /leftypol/
>>7989871
Lol what? Your average /pol/ user has quite literally read two or three times as much as your average /lit/ poster.
If it wasn't for the occasional /pollacks/ coming to this board, we'd be stuck talking about john green.
>>7990270
0/10
Really embarrassing
>>7990270
The celestial communion of the Hyperjew is imminent. Thank Odin/Thor (not Jesus, known Jew) that /pol/ is here with infographs.
>>7985076
Right-wing libertarian here. I can understand a desire for rights and liberties, but I do not understand why people want to redistribute wealth.
So I ask you a question with due respect:
Why do leftists want to redistribute wealth?If you do choose to reply, please state political alignment. I don't want misunderstanding.
>>7990576
>Why do leftists want to redistribute wealth?
Because if we don't redistribute wealth all rights and liberties will always be available only for upper/middle class and just a meaningless sign on a paper for others.
>>7990601
How so? And is the ladder not climbable to all classes?
>>7990576
>Right-wing
>libertarian
Pick one and only one.
>>7990643
>How so?
For example, if a normal man wants to marry an other man and maybe adopt a child (I don't know what are the rules about adoption in every country, so please consider that, this is just an example), he can do it, he can spend money for achieving this goal. A poor man won't spend his little funds for this sort of things.
>And is the ladder not climbable?
In some cases, yes, of course. If a man lives in a rich family with all sort of connections he can do everything. And yes, there's a lot of poor people that got great jobs, made themselves, but they had to work harder and probably they've been also very lucky.
>>7990576
Because meritocracy cannot be achieved when generations benefit from the wealth of their parents. That is systematic inequality.
Because every man is born equal, but not of equal ability. "Hard work" can never be a full substitute for natural competence of talent.
Whoops, I mean: Because I don't want to work lol!
>>7990643
>is the ladder not climbable to all classes?
LOL no it fucking isn't, Nick Carraway
>>7990643
More inequalities implies less social mobility.
>>7990676
In reference to your first example:
I think that in order to have something someone must have the 'means' to have it. The example of having a child applies equally to all: if they do not have the funds then they cannot manage the child. This can also be applied to things such as cars. Although most people could eventually afford their dream car, they may not have the money to maintain it (same applies to houses.) Now this should not be seen as a 'meaningless right on paper,' (the right to own a nice house or car) this should be seen as a fact of reality: one cannot own something which he cannot accommodate for.
A man is not restricted because he cannot afford what his neighbor has, he is restricted by his own ability to accommodate what he wants.
>>7990650
You have to be at least 18 to post on this board.
>>7990713
This may simply due to the size of the gap. The difference is that of 10,000 a year to multi-billionaires. Less mobility is to be expected. Higher mobility could likely be seen in nations with a smaller earnings gap.
>>7990576
Redistribution of "wealth" wouldn't solve anything since even if you changed the distribution to something really egalitarian but kept the current institutions it would just change back within a generation or two.
It's the process instead of the outcome that you have to look at.
How wealth is accumulated and its forms is what matters. Most of the wealthy hold their wealth in the form of liquid assets like stocks and real-estate. Wealthier households plunge into stocks and poorer households go into debt by borrowing from the wealthy at interest to spend and increase the value of the assets of the wealthy. The system requires the creation of a massive underclass that has to exist to support it that has to be kept stupid and ignorant otherwise people might stop borrowing and spending.
>>7990718
>This can also be applied to things such as cars. Although most people could eventually afford their dream car, they may not have the money to maintain it (same applies to houses.) Now this should not be seen as a 'meaningless right on paper,' (the right to own a nice house or car) this should be seen as a fact of reality: one cannot own something which he cannot accommodate for.
>implying social stoicism is desirable
If people stop consuming beyond their means you just get a recession and no one especially capitalists want that. There's entire industries that encourage people to take on credit and spend "beyond their means", it's their whole business model.
>>7990752
I see no problem with borrowing. It is the choice of either party to do so.
No one is kept ignorant. The lower classes stay low because they do not choose to educate themselves and make better decisions.
>>7990789
I refute your claim. Mass social stoicism would not lead to a recession, but it may lead to the closing of many large businesses and worthwhile businesses would prosper (i.e. health food retailers, gyms, colleges, ect.).
>>7990728
I genuinely don't understand what you are trying to say. The regression shows that higher mobility is actually seen in nations with smaller earning gaps.
>>7986243
kys
>>7985076
80% of this board is Marxist to some degree
>>7990790
Ignorance is a structural necessity it's not a "mistake". Trillions of dollars world-wide are spent on education and marketing/advertising to just keep the system functioning.
What would happen if the lower classes decided "to educate themselves and make better decisions". Would everyone just live off dividends and be a lender? How would like that system even function?
why are left-wingers always so physically weak? like, pick up some dumbells or something lol
>>7990797
>I refute your claim. Mass social stoicism would not lead to a recession, but it may lead to the closing of many large businesses and worthwhile businesses would prosper (i.e. health food retailers, gyms, colleges, ect.).
That's not a refutation. The "closing of many large businesses" would result in a massive liquidity crisis. What you're describing is just reorienting the economy towards more utilitarian consumption goods.
Remember after 9/11 happened and Bush reminded everyone to go out and shop?
>>7990828
because we're too poor to eat well
>>7990601
>What is government provided/subsidised education and the social safety net?
A lot of the problems are cultural things. The Chinese in America value education and look where they are.
>>7990848
Meaning you're too stupid to shop properly, don't know how to cook and spend all your money on pharmakeia.
>>7990823
>Would everyone just live off dividends and be a lender? How would like that system even function?
I will answer that question with another question:
Have you considered the ambition of a worker? Have you considered the man who works three jobs because he has a dream? Have you considered the young man who has not saved up enough money to live off of his dividends yet?
Not all men simply want to remain still. There are the workers.
>>7990798
Exactly. Higher mobility correlates with smaller earning gaps and lower mobility correlates with higher earning gaps. The greater the gap, the lower the mobility. This is because more diverse pay-grades signify a larger gap to leap ergo lower OVERALL mobility. This does not express relative mobility. 'Overall' mobility is the key term. Compare the highest earners and the lowest earners of two countries at separate ends of that chart and you may understand what I am saying.
>>7990848
Oatz are cheap and so are squatz.
>>7990855
The problem is the free market doesn't have a way to solve any of these issues.
The poor don't have the funds or will to better themselves because of their position. A small percentage might break out of the trap but most never will because they are poor to begin with and their stupidity can be monetized and made a source of profit by the more intelligent wealthy to exploit.
The poor just breed faster in worse poverty and the situation gets worse and you end up with more crime instead of more rational responses.
>>7990884
No, you are just blatantly a moron. Chicken and oats are dirt cheap. You can buy a gigantic bag of chicken for about 11 dollars and that shit will last you a whole week. Oats are so damn cheap. All you must do is buy them in the damn tube.
The social system in not oppressing you. You can feed your body adequately for very cheap.
>>7990879
>Have you considered the ambition of a worker? Have you considered the man who works three jobs because he has a dream? Have you considered the young man who has not saved up enough money to live off of his dividends yet?
>Not all men simply want to remain still. There are the workers.
You're just describing a psychological state, I'm not a psychoanalysis or something but it sounds like your describing a poor victim of ideology.
You can get richer much quicker through crime if you're really smart.
>>7990897
Why don't most Americans just eat Chicken and oats instead of over priced fast food then? What's preventing them from making rational decisions if not the social system?
>>7990910
They're dumb.
>>7990828
say that to my face fucker not online and see what happens
>>7990915
Then the situation won't change and just get worse if you don't intervene. People will keep doing the "irrational" thing and companies will keep investing more of their profits back into advertising/marketing to expand their demand more and increase profits yet again and lower their cost relative to the "rational" choice. Peoples consciousness have been crafted by corporations for the past 100 years and that won't change any time soon.
>>7990915
have you considered why they're so dumb and who might be benefiting from keeping them in such a state?
>>7990939
Hemingway preparing his lunch in this pic.
>>7990884
>their stupidity can be monetized and made a source of profit by the more intelligent wealthy to exploit
why is this bad?
I don't know how you can learn about surplus value and not immediately want to accept socialism.
also this:
http://strikemag.org/bullshit-jobs/
>>7989902
>It's about ending exploitation through the only means available
Which is why Nazi Germany ran on Keynesian capitalism and weakened the labour unions...
>>7985076
check out this one OP
fucking beta
>>7991422
Damn, you must be the coolest person in your Young Republicans club!
>>7991422
Nice homage to Lenin's Left-Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder
>>7985964
Do not do this. Just listen to his lectures. Believe me, I've slogged through almost a thousand pages of his incoherence, I do not wish it on anyone.
I recommend just reading good nonfiction, not apolitical, but not explicitly political either. You can learn a lot from history, but also from the social sciences and philosophy. Just commit yourself to education, let the opinions flow from it.
>>7991427
and you must be the favorite orbiter of the cute blue haired girl in your intro to pol sci class!
if you keep linking her witty john oliver vids on Facebook maybe shell find your personality agreeable enough to get some coffee with you!
>>7991438
>implying I'm in college
I'm an adult, friendo.
>>7986193
>Lobbing bricks and bombs never win anyone over to the cause of anarchism or general leftism.
yeah but you won't be able to say what is needed until your enemies are no longer in power, bricks and bombs are useful to this end.
>>7991422
Liberalism isn't leftism you underaged mong.
>>7991491
yes it is
>>7991491
Not necessarily, but left-liberalism is the praticing ideology of many governments. See Merkal
>>7990939
>hemmingway
>physically strong
come on, son
>>7990576
PROPERTARIAN GET OUT
>>7989740
Even more reason that it's time for them to get the fuck out
>leftist on my /lit/
I didn't know I shared a board with retards.
>>7991525
Merkel is CDU, dumbass.
>>7991513
Why are you even here?
Has anyone noticed that if you replace "the bourgeoisie" with "the jews", a lot of left-wingers start to sound like /pol/, and vice versa?
>>7986193
reminder I know your old tripcode
>>7992731
probably because you're a newfag
>>7991557
realistically he'd kick your scrawny ass
>>7992925
Edgelords are not a single belief they are a structure beliefs are added to, a framework. Its one of the latter things the brain discards as it grows into maturity. there is no difference between the left or the right when it comes to teens and YAs, their opinions are based on pure emotion and once the decision to be left or right has been reached they defend it into any realm of unreasonableness and cannot be persuaded otherwise, because logic and reason are not part of the initial decision they cannot break it yet. Then they grow up, have a real life they are the only one responsible for and no time for crap and it all fades away. Or they go into talk radio.
>>7992967
What were the assumptions you just made about me you pretentious, precocious, pre-med? I feel that I must inform you that I graduated magna cum laude, with honors, from MIT with dual degrees in theoretical physics (the black hole kind) and experimental physics (the I built the large hadron collider kind). I was selected as a fellow at several prestigious institutions before I even received my two masters degrees from Harvard (Master of Arts in Near Eastern Languages and Cultures from FAS, and Master of Public Policy from the Kennedy School). Yes, I worked at ETH Zurich (they recruited me specifically, for my groundbreaking work in the field of Crispr/cas9 genome editing) and served as a personal tutor and inspiration for Zaha Hadid shortly before she died (I was recognized for being the next Frank Gehry and some say she died from jealousy over my latest sinusoidal houseboat design). So I want you to carefully reconsider engaging in debate with me. You must understand that I can speak at 350 words per minute and you have no chance of refuting every point that I will make and I will make these points with flawless logic. Oh, logic, you ask? Yes, I actually invented a new fallacy when I was in third grade. You have no chance. So perchance you want to try me, be warned: I have analyzed everything you've stated with a convolutional neural network of my own design (Torch is for amateurs) and determined that you're just an academic poseur, a nothing. My machine-learning code knows everything about you and your measly H-Index score of 1. So if you think you can try me, go ahead. I'm the editor of five major academic journals and co-editor of twelve more, and they're all in different disciplines. If you think you're ever going to publish again, well, you'd better know that imposter syndrome isn't actually the case in your situation; you actually don't belong. So, 1st-year, you'd better watch your back at the next undergraduate poster conference at which you show your dim-witted face, because I'll be there, ready to ask hard-hitting, relevant questions, ready to tear your poster down. Think hard, because I don't think you know the powers I can invoke to make your academic life disappear.
>>7985987
Club of Rome - "The Limits to Growth" and "The First Global Revolution"
Thomas Malthus - "An Essay on the Principle of Population"
>>7992982
>horseshoe theory
Kill yourself.
