What is Piero Scaruffi's political position?
Missionary for 12 year olds
>>60587812
Anti-liberal left, quite like Slavoj Žižek.
>>60587858
I hope that wasn't intended to be praise
>>60587787
Hates darkies to be honest
>>60587885
Why not? That is literally the most red pilled political ideology out there.
>>60587885
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dNbWGaaxWM
classic economic conservative (nothing at all similar to republicans of tody)
moderate social liberal (his gay marriage thing amounted mostly to a "who cares, worry about something more important please")
/mu/ - The Ziz
>>60587918
>>60587906
>>60587787
run little girl, run
>>60587900
>Thinks the best non-classical album of all-time is Charles Mingus' "The Black Saint and the Sinner Lady"
I don't think so.
The opposite of whoever is in power in Italy at the time.
>>60587964
You can't rek the zizek
>>60587964
I was expecting cringe, but I actually agree.
>>60587964
*sniff* *sniff*
kuckism
>>60587964
But why are personal experiences bad for the emancipatory movement? All he does here is an argument from authority.
>>60587964
C A P I T A L I S H M
>>60587858
>>60587927
Is there even any evidence of what his political views are, besides that gay marriage article?
>>60588293
>All he does here is an argument from authority.
He isn't saying Deleuze is right because he's Deleuze, so don't do the "muh fallacies" thing like a redditor. He's just saying that Deleuze was onto something. And no, he doesn't break down the argument in the quote... but why should he? It's not clear what the context of the quote even was. Was he just saying what he thought about an issue in passing? Was he giving a quick talk and glossed through the point?
>But why are personal experiences bad for the emancipatory movement?
I'm not sure exactly what the entire context of the quote is, seeing as how it's a little snippet from a facebook quote, but I'll give it a crack. Obviously he does believe that there is room for discussions of the experiences of others. He doesn't deny that there are differences in life experiences for women and other minorities because of some historical developments. The fundamental point is how liberal identity politics distances itself from the universalisms which underpin the very emancipatory politics which birthed liberalism in the first place. Emancipatory politics, since the dawn of the modern era (The Enlightenment, The French Revolution, Marxism), has always come hand-in-hand with universalisms. Kant, in What Is Enlightenment?, insisted upon the universal nature of reason: any man or woman could and should 'dare to know'/question, and the universal qualities of subjective cognition and moral imperatives. The French Revolution insisted upon universal brotherhood and freedom for all. Marx urged for the emancipation of the universal class (whose interests were in fact the interests of all mankind). Privileging certain subjectivities over others is a negation of such universalisms and fundamentally undermines the promise of emancipatory politics: Freedom and liberty for all through the use of an all-inclusive and universal Reason. You cannot do this by insisting on an irreducible subjective difference the way liberals have.
>>60588811
The metric fuckton of books he's written? The talks he regularly gives? I'm sure some of them must dive into exactly what his relationship is with Marx.
>>60587858
where did you pull that from lmfao
he's probably just a centrist democrat
>>60588811
He seems to be pretty strongly against consumer capitalism:
http://pt.slideshare.net/scaruffi/how-to-kill-yourself-your-country-and-your-planet-in-a-few-easy-stepsand-feel-good-about-it
>>60588021
underrated
>>60588863
oh wow i'm dum
>>60588811
http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/problems.html
>For gun control
>For universal health insurance
>Against adoption of children by gay couples
>Against death penalty
>Against drug use, but also against the War on Drugs
>Against unskilled immigrants
>For environmental protection
He's mostly liberal.
>>60589371
>average households investing in the stock market is a bad thing
>>60587787
Im guessing unabomber tier
>>60588829
That seems a good explanation man, thanks!
>>60589595
I'm not a philosophy major, I've hardly read much from the history of philosophy. Take what I say with a huge grain of salt.
>>60587964
>Now what you have in the case of 4chan is a macabro [sic] expression of ideology similar to Yugoslavia in the 1980s. If you have not heard of the lasting fashion, like pepe the scatological toad in which past visions of uber and undermen are sublimated in a surreal manner, you are told to go to ray-did or tumbler because you aren't part of the tribe and commune and so on and so on. *sniff* There is an old East German joke in which an engineer gets sent to Siberia and he tells his friend beforehand that in his letters all that is true will be written with blue ink and all that is not with red and so in the first letter what is written on red is that how great the Gulag is and how they get new clothes and women and so on - in red ink. Only thin that is missing is blue ink. If we see this in the case of 4chan *sniff*, this is precisely the case. We have all the red ink we want - mehmehs, endless jokes and freudian ironies which go a long way to show us a creative and modern men.
>But there are no memes to show true pain, the truth of 4chan which is that it does not hate the Other, but rather, itself to the point of it unable to consider crippling solitude without turning it to a joke of having "no gf" or drawing a comic of two fellows you have here in the illustration. These men eat up ideology, shit ideology and make nonsensical machines out of ideology so that they don't see ideology, but an entertaining process of alienation and so on.
damn.....
