I'm reading The Elementary Particles right now and its pretty good. Why do people talk about this ugly bastard like hes some kind of arch-reactionary or fascist or something? I see these from people denouncing him and from /pol/ types trying to claim him as one of theirs. He likes to poke at liberals a bit, but mostly he just seems depressed.
>>8239784
He writes about how people now are systematically conditioned to be isolated and unfulfilled in life. There's no sense of community, nothing binding us together, nothing beyond ourselves -- we've become a bunch of lonely individuals. I think /pol/ misunderstands him, thinking that because he criticizes the status quo he necessarily agrees with their ridiculous political views.
>>8239784
Because if you speak out against sexual liberation you can only ever be an anti-enlightenment Satan.
It's the biggest ( and maybe only ) victory of the 1960's and thin-skinned boomers can't handle the fact someone offers a convincing critique against their dynamiting of the mores surrounding sexuality and the destruction of the family unit.
>>8239825
/pol assumes ANYBODY criticising the status quo is either a leftist brony or one of them. And they certainly don\t read stuff on Houllebecq level.
>>8239825
>He writes about how people now are systematically conditioned to be isolated and unfulfilled in life.
this only holds for men.
Women have the best life a human have ever had so far. If only men listened to women and accepted that men are a commodity to women, then men would be non resentful.
good sex makes women happy and makes men feel valued
>>8239939
>>8239942
>>8239784
>Why do people talk about this ugly bastard like hes some kind of arch-reactionary or fascist or something?
Because he is one of the few people nowadays who offers a critique of modernity that isn't "YOU'RE A FUCKING WHITE MALE!"
That automatically makes him a shitlord in many people's eyes.
woah this guy's really ugly. be looks like a certain character from a TV show or movie. I can't place it. some kind of gremlin or demon or some shit.
>>8239933
Everyone's a commodity to everyone else. If there's one lesson capitalism has to offer that's it.
>>8239942
>>8239946
trash adaptation 2bh m8
>>8240015
t.roastie
>>8240030
dat buttgap
Actually all Houellebecq cares about is sex and hates the fact he isn't getting enough. He's a regular at sex clubs where swinging happens, so this dude is all about the harem.
That's why he starts to get really interested in the possibility of having an islamic state in France because ( he thinks ) it would allow him to have multiple women.
Before that he wanted to have countries turn into sex worker paradises ( read "Platform" ), since that's something capitalism could offer, but since leftist victorians are now starting to combat prostitution instead of allowing it, that option is less likely for him ( legally anyway )... And islam seems like the best bet to have loads of women (legally).
For some reason he's obsessed with the "it must be socially sanctioned to have many women, otherwise it's troublesome for me".
He seems, like many French (and all Euro's for that matter), extremely rudderless without rules, and extremely legalist. That's why at the end of the day I hate him after reading his stuff, because he seems like a helpless child without the social body saying "it's ok".
>>8240055
'He's a regular at sex clubs where swinging happens'
Source?
What is known of his real life?
>>8240181
>Source?
Personal experience.
>>8240191
Horseshit.
>>8240196
He's not *that* kinky.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtiJQZTqu9M
He talks about Tocqueville and his views of democracy here. (It has subs if you need them)
I read Whatever and The Elementary Particles which were fine. He makes some interesting points.
>>8240015
He bears resemblance to Ichabod Crane from The Wolf Among Us.
>>8240015
this guy?
>>8240310
kek
>>8239882
/pol/ is my homeboard faggot and I certainly read more than you.
And better.
Choke on a dick.
>>8239784
His male characters say stuff like "Women are dumb."
>>8240055
lel
It's clear he fucks a lot ofbeuretteprostitutes and faps to youporn and reads youtube comments but I don't think he's anything like a womanizer/sex addict.
Soumission was Houellebecq saying, even lazy white kids can be Muslim and they'd enjoy it.
>>8240181
That's what you'd call a well-known rumor. Rest of that anon's post, however, is blind bullshit from someone who obviously hasn't read his books (and I can tell this without having read them myself, to give you an idea of how obvious it is)
>>8240369
>beurette
what does this word mean?
>>8240055
>Actually all Houellebecq cares about is sex and hates the fact he isn't getting enough.
Wow it's as if the type of people who would criticize a flawed system are those who are discriminated by it!
>>8240511
>not getting laid because you're ugly is discrimination
top tumblr
>>8240518
Check your genetic privilege, but nice way to admit that the system is flawed.
Here's a tip: beauty is just the product of ideology.
>>8240413
french slang for 'arab girl'
watch the movie 'the kidnapping of michel houellebecq'
Mental illness and intelligence and two different beasts.
To evaluate him you have to be able to differentiate, or multitask your thinking: hold two different ideas or opinions at once. Be careful, smoke may come out of your ears. Eyes may spin uncontrollably.
>>8240310
no another bald headed gremlin lol
>>8240557
>beauty is just the product of ideology
In-tandem, I assume, with certain 'genetic' traits like facial symmetry and harmonious proportionality?
>>8240646
You only find that to be beautiful because of ideology you retard.
>>8240369
Such a pity beurette porn is all terribly bad and only features uggos
>>8240657
But ideology is just the glamour; without the object, ideology is just a stale fart in an empty room.
Tell me, though, just how the beauty of proportional elements is ideologically determined. I admit, I am ignorant.
>>8240691
Ideology has material existence.
>Tell me, though, just how the beauty of proportional elements is ideologically determined
You find it beautiful because society set you up to find it so.
>>8240894
Do other animals have socially imposed ideology too?
>>8240921
>Naturalism fallacy
Gonna stop you right there
>>8240015
I think you're thinking of hoggle
>>8240933
I asked a simple question.
>>8240934
no its a bald headed thing. maybe from a fairytale or animated movie
>>8240936
Ideology has no history so there's no way of knowing.
>>8240894
>You find it beautiful because society set you up to find it so.
Set me up HOW? All you've said here is 'ideology functions because the material conditions of its functioning are present'. What are they, though?
>>8241035
>HOW?
ISAs
>>8241047
Which means WHAT?
>>8241057
I'm not going to fucking spoonfeed you on ideology, this is /lit/ you should already know this.
Read Althusser's essay on ISAs and RSAs and then some critical theory.
>>8241067
No, don't hide behind the work of others. Explain what you mean.
>>8241067
>critical theory
Barista detected.
>>8241086
>>8241099
I'm not going to write and post an entire fucking essay frok my phone on a topic that's already been covered to death just because some autist wants to go "not an argument!".
You're a fucking retard if you think taking knowledge and analysis that others already did and that benefiting from their work is "hiding".
>>8241116
Intelligent people can summarize succinctly.
>>8241116
I'm asking for, like, three sentences, you lazy cretin.
And no, pointing to Althusser and back at me while screeching 'ALREADY INTERPOLATED' is not an argument.
>>8241132
>I'm asking for, like, three sentences
Except that you'll keep asking the simplest questions and I'll end up writing an essay anyways.
>not an argument
Ebin
And this was never an argument in the first place, this was you not knowing critical theory and expecting others to teach it to you. You're fetishizing originality as if it's always desirable.
>>8241134
kys
>>8241155
I'm well acquainted with Marxian theorists of all stripes, thank you. And I'm not asking you to be original; I'm calling out a charlatan.
>>8241155
>kys
Why? You're the ugly one.
>>8241168
>And I'm not asking you to be original
-> >>8241086 >>8241099
>oh hey bro can you explain why things fall
>oh well there's this thing called gravity and if you want to learn more about it pick up a physics textbook
>OH MY GOD STOP HIDING BEHIND THE WORK PF OTHERS
>I'm calling out a charlatan.
Nothing that I've posted is pretentious.
>>8241170
>You're the ugly one.
Says who?
>>8241183
>Says who?
I do. Retard.
>>8241187
You've never seen me, pretentious fuck.
>>8241196
>you can't know someone through their words
>>8241183
A first year physics student would be able to give a very simple and concise but clear outline of the mechanism of gravity. Would probably be glad to, considering its their chosen field of study. Yet you evade even this basic gesture.
Charlatanism is not identical with pretentiousness, nor was that the angle of my chide. I'don't explain myself, but I'm sure there's a dictionary handy. Check it out.
>>8241202
Not how they look like.
>>8241208
>A first year physics student would be able to give a very simple and concise but clear outline of the mechanism of gravity. Would probably be glad to, considering its their chosen field of study.
I'm a third-year student of physics so you're wrong :-)
I wouldn't want to even begin explaining Einstein's relativism to you
>Charlatanism is not identical with pretentiousness
char·la·tan
ˈSHärlədən,ˈSHärlətn/
noun
a person falsely claiming to have a special knowledge or skill; a fraud.
pre·ten·tious
prəˈten(t)SHəs/
adjective
attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed.
Looks like the only charlatan here is you.
>>8241224
No, you've simply exposed yourself for both a charlatan AND a pretentious snot. But the subtleties of language can escape even the most apt pupil. You're forgiven.
>>8241239
Calling anyone pretentious with your use of language is a pot/kettle situation at best, famalam.
>>8241250
Hey, you looked up irony while you were at it. Bully for you.
>>8241253
I am not the ideology poster.
>>8241264
Does it matter?
>>8241239
>But the subtleties of language
There's no subtlety in definitions.
>>8241270
Not true. Even less so when it comes to use.
>>8241267
Your response doesn't make sense if it isn't to him. I'm just mildly irked by your pomposity, but it is past my bedtime; I'll respond to your wittily condescending reply in the morning.
>>8241288
Don't bother.
>>8241287
>Not true
Not an argument :^)
>>8241290
>uglyfuck
Prove it
>>8241310
Now you're pod-racing ;^P
>>8241326
Here's your reply.
>>8241333
And for you.
>>8241338
(you)
>>8241342
No (u).
>>8241313
>ugly AND a postivist
>my metaphorical vagina when
>>8241361
*positivist
>>8241116
I.Q. – The modes of behaviour appropriate to the most advanced state of technical development are not confined to the sectors in which they are actually required. So thinking submits to the social checks on its performance not merely where they are professionally imposed, but adapts to them its whole complexion. Because thought has by now been perverted into the solving of assigned problems, even what is not assigned is processed like a problem. Thought, having lost autonomy, no longer trusts itself to comprehend reality, in freedom, for its own sake. This it leaves, respectfully deluded, to the highest-paid, thereby making itself measurable. It behaves, even in its own eyes, as if it had constantly to demonstrate its fitness. Even when there is no nut to crack, thinking becomes training for no matter what exercise. It sees its objects as mere hurdles, a permanent test of its own form. Considerations that wish to take responsibility for their subject-matter and therefore for themselves, arouse suspicion of being vain, windy, asocial self-gratification. Just as for neo-positivists knowledge is split into accumulated sense-experience and logical formalism, the mental activity of the type for whom unitary knowledge is made to measure, is polarized into the inventory of what he knows and the spot-check on his thinking-power: every thought becomes for him a quiz either of his knowledgeability or his aptitude. Somewhere the right answers must be already recorded. Instrumentalism, the latest version of pragmatism, has long been concerned not merely with the application of thought but the a priori condition of its form. When oppositional intellectuals endeavour, within the confines of these influences, to imagine a new content for society, they are paralysed by the form of their own consciousness, which is modelled in advance to suit the needs of this society. While thought has forgotten how to think itself, it has at the same time become its own watchdog. Thinking no longer means anything more than checking at each moment whether one can indeed think. Hence the impression of suffocation conveyed even by all apparently independent intellectual productions, theoretical no less than artistic. The socialization of mind keeps it boxed in, isolated in a glass case, as long as society is itself imprisoned. As thought earlier internalized the duties exacted from without, today it has assimilated to itself its integration into the surrounding apparatus, and is thus condemned even before the economic and political verdicts on it come fully into force.
>>8242389
What did this have to do with anything?
>>8242435
'You're an idiot.'
>>8240577
epic
>>8240576
>french slang for 'arab girl'
>watch the movie 'the kidnapping of michel houellebecq'
Very underrated movie, truly the key to Houellebecq's work.
>>8239882
But I am /pol/ and this is my 2nd most frequented board (see how I didn't say "favourite"?). What now~
>>8239882
you forgot the (((jews))) and mudslimes.
>>8243999
You really are a pseud, you know that?
>>8244293
t. /pol/tard
>>8244316
>he doesn't even know how to differentiate between posters based on writing style and content. On 4chinsome.
Waste yourself.
>>8240921
Not you interlocutor, but I think the point that was not elaborated on here is that many elements of beauty (like symmetry and proportion) are favored in the mating habits of most non-human animals. No doubt ideology seizes on this predisposition, but your assertion that all beauty-valuations are simply due to ideology is absurd. For an Althusserian, you sure don't take material reality seriously.
>>8244323
t. Non-reading faggot
