Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the format Name#Password
[i]Italic Text[/i]
[b]Bold Text[/b]
[spoiler]Spoiler Text[/spoiler]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace Text[/pre]
[super]Superset Text[/super]
[sub]Subset Text[/sub]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists


Gen Z and the future of social liberties

View Thread Reply
- Sun, 29 Dec 2019 20:33:43 EST fGHDtkRk No.209898
File: 1577669623343.jpg -(32233B / 31.48KB, 612x612) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Gen Z and the future of social liberties

I just thought this was interesting and completely contradicts the prevailing notion I see in some places that our generation is somehow more "right-leaning" or "conservative" than millenials. I think there is this weird tiny but vocal clique among extremely online Gen-Zers (which is a relatively small clique in and of itself) that are people at various stages of falling down the alt-right pipeline. Call it the "PewDiePipeline" if you really want to piss these people off, because he's a spotless victim of the ebil newspapers that have the audacity to report the things he says and does

But mentioning that, it is a little concerning that one of the most popular personalities on one of the most popular platforms among generation Z is a guy that keeps coming closer and closer to flirting with outright, unironic, fascism. That said, I don't think most of his kid fan base gives a shit, they just want to see the funny screaming swedish man, but they might internalize enough of what he says that they start to believe the garbage he peddles. He unironically told his 50 million subscribers to read 12 Rules for Life lmao, oh and there's the whole wearing an iron cross on a video where you announce you're rescinding a donation to an anti-hate organization, and the whole "death to all Jews" but it's actually a really funny joke xd, and following people like Stefan Molyneux and Millenial Woes on Twitter, and defending Jon Tron, and a bunch of other gaffs).

But I mean, his fans and YouTube reply guys in general are let's say not the most socially successful among us. So I really don't know how much influence the things they believe has on the real world.

And at the same time, more liberal personalities are coming to the forefront on a website that has historically had an undeniably reactionary user base. And despite the inherent contradictions of it, most of the "right-wing" Gen-zers still don't give a shit about race, gender or gender identity, sexuality, because they were brought up in a way where none of these things were even presented as contentious issues, shitty attack helicopter jokes not withstanding

So, are the kids alright?

Being 22 I am one, albeit on the older end that mostly rejects the title (personally I love my generation, and identify far more with them than millenials) but i have a very carefully selected social circle so i can't possibly have an unbiased opinion, most of the people I know are on the far Left, I just encircled myself with like-minded people because there's no reason not to in this day and age, but I try to get a feel for what people think as a whole, because that ultimately affects my human rights as a (currently) protected minority
20 posts and 5 images omitted. Click View Thread to read.
Cedric Nisslesatch - Wed, 16 Feb 2022 21:31:32 EST vlgrnmUP No.210677 Reply
I see this alot. But if poverty causes criminality, does that mean there are no rich criminals? Secondly, I think violent crime is specifically the subject here. And it points to a level of civilization in a culture to pursue conflict resolution by other means. And a certain level of sophistication to resolve heightened conflict with high technology nuclear weapons instead of rocks and spears?
User is currently banned from all boards
Ebenezer Giddleforth - Thu, 17 Feb 2022 11:22:01 EST VzlITPwK No.210678 Reply
1645114921214.jpg -(18895B / 18.45KB, 480x360) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>Are there no rich criminals

They commit different crimes, ones that far more often go unpunished, some people obviously have issues with anti-social behavior, or are just bad people, and that's why they're criminals but a lot of poor people will steal to not starve/die, even kill if it means a better life for their children, it's not an excuse but billionaires fucking boys on little st. james while posting record profits during one of the darkest periods in history have absolutely no excuse, and they get off scott free with the occasional inconvenient one being suicided.

The point is that the existence of petty crime absolutely is a social issue, even if the people out there doing crimes to survive do more than they absolutely need to to not die, if they were to actually have their basic needs provided for by society which is how we survived for millions of years in close knit tribal communities with everyone working together, there would be far less, it wouldn't eliminate it entirely but it's very disingenuous to say well if it's not a perfect solution than we shouldn't do it, there are no perfect solutions to anything in life, there is no black or white only grey

>And a certain level of sophistication to resolve heightened conflict with high technology nuclear weapons instead of rocks and spears?

That's like the dumbest example you could've picked to make your point, nuclear weapons simply existing doesn't resolve anything, except one time a war that was already basically over I guess, now that the world powers all have they're basically useless to any sane leader, but could easily fall into the hands of one who isn't and that would be the certain end of mankind, what does that actually get us? What does their mere existence symbolize about our "civilization"?

>And it points to a level of civilization in a culture to pursue conflict resolution by other means

Oh OK I agree then glassing the entire planet is a much more civilized method of conflict resolution than jumpings and drive-bys

man i wish you weren't banned i would've wanted to pick your mirror-finish brain some more see what you'd come up with, just had to go post cp didn't you?
Fucking Greenville - Thu, 10 Mar 2022 22:37:23 EST Wa/2PG1L No.210713 Reply
Nazi Fucking Zombies
User is currently banned from all boards

Jung and God

View Thread Reply
- Wed, 08 Dec 2021 14:22:24 EST j/QkiNfq No.210635
File: 1638991344734.png -(3085956B / 2.94MB, 2560x1440) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Jung and God
Here is a clip of old Carl Gustav Jung being asked if he believes in god.


He says "I know, don't need to believe."

What does he mean by this? Do you have any clue as to how he reached that conclusion?
11 posts and 2 images omitted. Click View Thread to read.
Polly Worthinglock - Sun, 27 Feb 2022 23:44:28 EST kJvbsLrE No.210703 Reply
>consciousness only comes from greater consciousness

I tend to support the idea that consciousness is something that arises in complex information systems (i.e. us) after they reach a certain level of complexity/self-reference, an idea explained very well I think by Douglas Hofstadter in his book I Am A Strange Loop, which is satisfying to me because it explains the actual issue at hand (i.e. the nature of this phenomenon we're calling consciousness) in a comprehensive, clear way, and it requires no faith to explain, unlike something like "consciousness only comes from greater consciousness", which actually means fuck all, like what is the nature of this greater consciousness? how do we know? oh we "feel" it?

The universe is interesting and complex enough as it is, we don't need to trick ourselves into wondering at nothing.
User is currently banned from all boards
Fucking Greenville - Thu, 10 Mar 2022 22:33:47 EST Wa/2PG1L No.210711 Reply
Sermones is bullshit it's fucking magic spells and crazy shit like that

I'm willing to bet he was gay.
User is currently banned from all boards
Fucking Greenville - Thu, 10 Mar 2022 22:35:34 EST Wa/2PG1L No.210712 Reply
Psychenomy - calling people names
User is currently banned from all boards

Age old Capitalism vs. Socialism

View Thread Reply
- Sun, 07 Mar 2021 17:44:06 EST D7oNUOvN No.210385
File: 1615157046904.jpg -(92000B / 89.84KB, 699x720) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Age old Capitalism vs. Socialism
Why is this debate so undervalued and overlook? I personally think this discourse is the foundation for human development in the future. Let me feed on your thoughts.
17 posts and 3 images omitted. Click View Thread to read.
Charles Sanningkere - Tue, 22 Feb 2022 10:07:51 EST DtTugHZR No.210696 Reply
To add to this. Honestly it just takes a small stroke of genius or being in the right place at the right time.

Do you think the banking cartels really wanted trump to get elected?

Crazy shit can easily happen at the flip of a dime. This is the knowledge they are terrified of.
User is currently banned from all boards
Charles Sanningkere - Tue, 22 Feb 2022 10:10:32 EST DtTugHZR No.210697 Reply
And what are politicians without their supporters? What are politicians if they cannot get you to think what they want you to think?

What is supporting corruption is that we as a people have become too lazy to try and change what our government and politicians are doing.

The entire house of cards crumbles without our support. It doesn't matter how corrupt you think they are.
User is currently banned from all boards
Charles Sanningkere - Tue, 22 Feb 2022 10:22:38 EST DtTugHZR No.210698 Reply
And what do all politicians like? To be elected. To have supporters. And to make money.

The goal is to make C require A and B.

It is our complacency which is silently supporting them. When more people start to get involved in changing the government, eventually politicians will be forced to follow, as populists. It requires a certain threshold to be crossed. That's it.

The entire thing is an illusion.
User is currently banned from all boards


View Thread Reply
- Tue, 27 Feb 2018 07:07:30 EST wGBBLTy5 No.208814
File: 1519733250725.jpg -(14466B / 14.13KB, 250x188) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Illogic.
I am so tired of illogical people. I am so tired of someone having the audacity of saying “I’m using facts and logic” when They’re pushing logical fallacies and backing them up by overlooking facts that detract from the argument.

Why does everyone have this mentality “I have to win the argument.”? Like I’ll correct someone using my knowledge, using first-hand experience and using hard evidence, and instead of learning from me they exclaim an illogical conclusion they illogically jumped to via a singular fact they know about the subject, and then just because they have 1 fact and 1 (irrational) reason they say “You can’t argue with me; I am the voice of logic and facts!”
I am so sick of the excuses. I am so sick of everyone running in fear from appearing to lose an argument. Like good god, growing and learning is much more valuable than being petty, than getting in the last word like a witty little cunt. I just don’t know how to reach peoples’ hearts, and I can’t say for sure whether Its my fault or their fault.
8 posts and 1 images omitted. Click View Thread to read.
Jarvis Greenham - Mon, 21 Feb 2022 10:40:06 EST WZd+XGnz No.210691 Reply
enthusiastic know-it-all*
Charles Sanningkere - Tue, 22 Feb 2022 09:48:27 EST DtTugHZR No.210694 Reply
Wise and practical words.

Terrible grammar.

But yeah, I feel like any serious seeker comes to this exact crossroad at some point and looks in the mirror.
User is currently banned from all boards

what do I say if PoC is racist

View Thread Reply
- Tue, 20 Apr 2021 08:43:07 EST yY7Ct6+H No.210407
File: 1618922587608.jpg -(241093B / 235.44KB, 736x1429) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. what do I say if PoC is racist
Hi so I made the mistake of saying "People of Colour" today when someone asked me how we said non-white people in English and I was informed it was highly racist.

If I want to say "_________ are treated worse in this country than white people" what is the non racist thing to say? (I mean people who aren't white, not just Black people, thanks)

(pic related because the British empire was racist)
16 posts and 2 images omitted. Click View Thread to read.
Graham Pummlesock - Tue, 21 Dec 2021 22:49:17 EST erZargJ8 No.210643 Reply
It's...very funny that you think that I have control over the correct use of the word "black" in the US for race categories. All right. I'll confer with the other people in the racial terminology caucus, so we can start getting beige and yellowish-brown black people seen as something other than black. I know that'd be useful to me personally as a Paper-Bag American, lol

nb for ridiculous
Jack !fXGyYTYKEM - Sat, 29 Jan 2022 06:24:00 EST RMLxY1R2 No.210654 Reply
The truth is that someone will ding you for racism in some way if it's at all public, no matter what you say on the subject. That's where things are in this country. We can debate the causes, but that so often either gets political or falls into the same trap of dividing one race from another and pointing fingers.
As far as I know - here in my country, USA - "people of color" should be fine. "African American", "Aisian American" (I know, I know) are the safest - and probably "whitest" terms. "Black" is fine atm, unless someone objects to that because they just want to solve problems (but if YOU are black, feel free to refer to your own people as "nig /- gers" or "my nig /- ga", informally, with no problem). Most of the other overtly racist slurs haven't been "taken back" yet and are universally offensive.

"Ethnic minorities" is a good generic one; no one can come down on that. Although, at some point in the not-too-distant future, whites here probably won't be a majority by themselves. Depending on how you define "whiteness," of course.

If you really want to get right down to it - no matter how you dress up the language - talking about non-whites as a group is, in itself, racist; it puts whites in a group against everyone else.

Keeping up with the exhaustive act of eggshell walking you have to do in this country to keep things politically correct is ridiculous. Now there's critical race theory (which originally was harmless, but has been suborned as part of the backlash against all the racism protests, riots, Black Lives Matter and so forth). So "anti-racism" (itself a racist term) is on the table, too.

There's the the sex/gender issues just really starting to gather steam, and the religious issues. Which I selfishly have to spend a second on, since it's always bothered me a little bit. As a military brat, most of the communities I lived in were mostly white and mostly Christian (or, at least, celebrated Christmas). Officially, government institutions (like schools) can't be seen to favor any religion, etc. So while 90% might be celebrating Christmas in X small town, it's referred to as "Winter Break" and the decorations are usually generic snowflakes, etc. There's always that one family that complains about Easter or even Halloween (the Fall Festival). My town finally threw in the towel on its manger scene maybe ten years ago (bars went up around all schools due to supposed generic school shooting fears last year; one entry, one exit. Crime here is really low. Separate thing but **** what is wrong with people).

I've really lost focus here. Sorry, I really just wanted to get some of my frustration with this stuff off my chest. I'll end with an experience: I went to flight school in south Florida. Flight school in the US is sort of an industry; pilots come from everywhere to train here. I was kind of shocked to find myself a minority, working with mostly non-citizens. The amount of "racism" there was was shocking, too. The first day of my first class, a Korean student (later a good friend) was asked to point out one of his home airports... and could not find South Korea on a map. A chat went out to the group: "The yellow man lost the yellow land."

I didn't know how to react to that - I figured there would be some kind of outrage - but there wasn't. And as the "racism" on campus went unabated in the following weeks, I got it. It wasn't a stupid thing to fight over to them. I ended up being friends with the Taiwanese and the Israelis (who were always direct and critical of Americans for politeness/beating around the bush).

Some of my best friends were a money-grubbing ****ing Jew, a Nigerian schemer no one could make out in the dark), and a wet /- back BECAUSE THEY USED IT AS AN ICEBREAKER. And let me know what an ignorant, inbred redneck I was. And it was fine.
John Bomblekutch - Thu, 17 Feb 2022 18:14:18 EST Wa/2PG1L No.210679 Reply
Just call them a jolly african-american to they're face. Be sincere.
User is currently banned from all boards

People are retarded

View Thread Reply
- Sun, 16 Jan 2022 20:15:04 EST 4sD/sZwc No.210645
File: 1642382104832.png -(226755B / 221.44KB, 707x505) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. People are retarded
Do you agree?
Hannah Grimwater - Tue, 18 Jan 2022 19:32:11 EST +Q2ycnHJ No.210646 Reply
only the people who aren't me
Molly Brillerfuck - Fri, 04 Feb 2022 14:37:57 EST +Q2ycnHJ No.210668 Reply
How do you know I'm a wizard? I haven't told anyone yet.

wittgenstein and gender

View Thread Reply
- Sat, 27 Jun 2020 17:06:55 EST fGHDtkRk No.210192
File: 1593292015858.jpg -(139447B / 136.18KB, 800x513) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. wittgenstein and gender
Something I'm currently working on, posting for critique. This is a rough draft of only one part of it. I've compiled a dozen or so sources for the claims here but have yet to go through and specifically cite everything and make corrections where necessary.

I rarely see it used this way, but I think the philosophy of Ludwig Wittgenstein is actually very powerful against biological essentialism if you can get someone to accept his premises before relating them to gender. This is particularly useful for convincing people who (pretend to) come from a purely secular background and are claiming to argue against the validity of trans gender identities from a "scientific" point of view.

Rather than arguing from the point of view of later continental philosophers like Derrida and Foucault, who these people ironically have no problem rejecting outright based on what they've heard about them without so much as even listening to what they have to say, arguing from the point of view of the founder (and arguably the most orthodox member) of the positivist, analytic tradition at the very least makes these faux-secularist arguments look as subjective and irrational as they truly are by stripping away the veneer of logic and reason.

[Introduce his philosophy with his "beetle in a box metaphor"]

As paraphrased in a film based on his life: "When you want to know the meaning of a word, don't look inside yourself, look at the uses of the word in our way of life. Look at how we behave". Wittgenstein suggests the only meaning which can be extracted from words is that which can be inferred from how they are used in a given language and that no single comprehensive definition exists for any word. In terms of human experience, this means no concrete "thing" can be said to exist which "causes" anything with-in the realm of internal experience, be it pain, emotions, religious experiences, or gender. "That whereof we cannot speak, thereof we must remain silent (Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus)".

His famous example is the word "game", for which no single definition can be given in the English language (or any language that isn't logically perfect). Instead, he argues, the definitions of words lie in what he calls "families of resemblance". In essence, a word cannot be comprehensively defined such that the definition is true in all instances. The best we can do to define a word is give a list of common traits and say "and that sort of thing" (Philosophical Investigations).

The example that many people might be familiar with from philosophy or psychology class is when it comes to the definition of the word "dog". When asked what a dog is, you might say it's a creature with fur, four legs, two ears, which barks, has a tail, and loves meat, but a dog could just as easily be hairless, three-legged, one-eared, mute, tail-less, or hate meat and still be a dog. Conversely, such a creature could also be a wolf, a coyote, or a fox. [I can explain why "mammal" doesn't work as a universal identifier to anyone here who would bring it up but anyone reading this for my class will already know why it doesn't]

With-in the realm of trans denialism, a very common and nonsensical argument you see is people pointing to a stereotypically masculine trans woman and saying "just look at them!", pointing to specific secondary sex characteristics like broader shoulders, larger hands, laryngeal prominence, etc. and saying "women don't look like that!" when in reality no single one of those traits is necessarily unique to cis men and trans women. Conversely, a cis man could have a smaller frame, smoother skin, no Adam's apple, a higher voice, etc. and still be a cis man.

When people bring up chromosomes one of my favorite things to ask is "what do chromosomes do?" because they almost never have an explanation. Chromosomes contain genetic code which tells cells how they should reproduce, but one of the biggest single things affecting human mortality is the fact that the cells very often mishear or don't listen at all. One example of many is the case of an embryo with XY chromosomes that has total androgen insensitivity, which means that it has cells that do not respond to the male sex hormones at all, but respond to female sex hormones normally, which causes the fetus to develop as female.

The child is born with typical female genitalia and other characteristics and goes on to develop in a way typical of the female sex until puberty. There are also many other intersex conditions which can lead to a child developing contrary to their chromosomes or in a way that does not neatly fall into either male or female. If you buy an end table from Ikea but use some of those parts to build a stool instead, it's not still a table just because the instructions say it is.

Wittgenstein's idea that the definitions of words lie in families of resemblance is also backed up by the prevailing theory of memory in cognitive psychology which posits that terms exist in our brains in these sort of networks of examples. In essence, when you perceive an object that you (think you) can identify with a word that you know in a given language, then whatever memory you have of it becomes associated with that word. So then when one hears or reads a word, a sort of shifting amalgam of all the sensory data associated with it is what actually comes to mind. So, for instance, considering the word "tree", not only do no two people have the same internal image, that internal image is different every single time that it's conjured up.

Wrapping back around to gender, since you can't know the internal experiences of another person and you can't peer into their cells to determine their chromosomes, (and since we've already established ch…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
7 posts and 3 images omitted. Click View Thread to read.
nope - Sun, 31 Oct 2021 00:50:47 EST vb1B5h56 No.210576 Reply
This does nothing to explain why transgender is valid though. All you are basically saying is there is no real way to categorize anything. If every homeostatic property cluster is just kind of socially chosen, then there is no privileged way to classify things. Also why is a persons own feelings and experiences the fundamental thing that gets to decide if they are a man or a women or something else?

Once you say there is no real way to classify a whole bunch of traits as male or female. You are basically also saying there is no way to really classify anything. I mean what is a hammer? Just because it has a handle and a metal head? Is that a hammer? Why? Why do those traits make it a hammer? Just because we say so? What's the difference between a hammer and a mallet? Which features truly define it? I could take all hammers on earth and split them into more and new categories endlessly.

Or even why think a hammer is one object? Just because it is connected? Maybe it is really 2 different things the handle and head are only in contact, not really one thing. OR split it down into atoms.

If we play identity games like this we destroy the ability to classify anything.
Jack !fXGyYTYKEM - Sat, 29 Jan 2022 07:27:48 EST RMLxY1R2 No.210660 Reply
Agreed, to an extent: this is the "antithesis" reaction to the thesis of "which sex organ do you have". Eventually I guess a synthesis of male/female (with the lines blurred a little), some gray lines drawn for the trans people who want to go back and forth (restroom use, etc), and some concessions made for those who find an identity in gender, with that gender being neither male nor female. Which will obviously never be perfect, since there are infinitely many of those (you could argue as many definitions for male gender exist as there are males - everything is granular - but it's splitting hairs).

OP, years ago, I would've liked to get into the details of your paper and give you useful feedback. That's not now, though. In some ways what you're saying reminds me of the Pandemonium theory of mind. Without getting into that, I think the mind is basically a set of associations - yeah, you got that in there; it's a common one, Piaget said something on the subject. My definition of "dog" is going to be subtly different than anyone else's, because the ...image? Unit?... that comes up when I ring that bell depends on all the experiences I've associated with it, back to somewhere near birth. Which - less now, but often enough - still means more significant differences across cultures.

There are cultural traditions which allowed for third genders - a particular one in the Caribbean - that might bear mention.

You're very good at using academic buzz-words - which you have to be, in academia - but throw enough of them together and you start alienating people. I've spent enough time outside it that my eyes just slid off your post until I made myself read it. Balance. There are phrases like your "Rather than..." paragraph which... other issues aside, that's a MEATY sentence. I can't untangle it right now while I'm drunk, and who knows if I will remember to try tomorrow, but there is a much simpler way to say it which also eliminates the narrative bias. I get that this stuff means something to you, because there's a fair amount of that in this paper, and you're going to have to get rid of it. E.g. "a very common and nonsensical argument". You don't make that judgment, you get the reader to make that judgment with evidence.

I could get into stuff like that, but you know, drunk. Have to go do that. The other guy hit the nail on the head with the end result of deconstructivsm. My answer to that in early college (bleak existentialism, you've pared everything down and nothing means anything) was Integral Theory, which - spiritual aspects aside - still has something to say about the shape of the world. Will try to rejoin this.
Lydia Duttingnedge - Sun, 30 Jan 2022 01:00:34 EST kJvbsLrE No.210665 Reply
The focus of this was definitely on Wittgenstein's theory of language using gender as an example, it wasn't initially meant to be a compelling piece of rhetoric, I just kind of took it in that direction after I started getting really convinced myself, I was high on my own fumes I don't actually think it's very good for convincing anyone else of anything in hindsight, but it was a fun albeit masturbatory game.

I also agree that were this an academic paper I would need to radically neutralize the tone of course I wouldn't be so unprofessional in that context but I wasn't writing this for anything I was writing it to write it, mostly to work out what I actually think, so this is more a snapshot of a viewpoint in formation than anything else, some of this I would still stand by but a lot of it I've drifted away from quite a bit by this point.

>You're very good at using academic buzz-words

I take issue with that though lol, it's just how I write unless I try to write differently. Call me insufferable sure but I'm not putting on airs.
User is currently banned from all boards

Thoughts on CRT

View Thread Reply
- Sat, 29 Jan 2022 06:49:25 EST 43LYWyNb No.210656
File: 1643456965960.webm [mp4] -(1245874B / 1.19MB, 416x416) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Thoughts on CRT
The racial mindset we see today is the result of generations of propaganda. Intentional propaganda pushed by whites who wanted the acceptance of other races. This was well meaning, but the fact is that the idea was universally pushed in an unnatural way.

As a result today's white youth have become racist as a symbol of independence, similar to the defiance of short lived traditions we saw in the 70's. Deep in their minds they understand they've been told what to think all their lives, they know what they are allowed to say, and they are having none of it. Not because they believe in any kind of supremacy, but because the end result has been further subjugation instead of equality or fairness.
User is currently banned from all boards

African Trinbal man talking about true happiness

View Thread Reply
- Wed, 26 Jan 2022 03:34:04 EST D6fIZvgv No.210652
File: 1643186044584.jpg -(49543B / 48.38KB, 426x640) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. African Trinbal man talking about true happiness
Hey b/ , i member long ago watching a video of an african tribal man talking about happiness, and his beautiful wife and children , while he was sitting in a field.
His child was playing in background and his wife had this crown of flowers ,it was simple crown and she lookd quite good in it.
Can someone post the vid, i can't seem to find it

postmodernism / post structuralism

View Thread Reply
- Sun, 23 Feb 2020 18:13:38 EST 3DvIxtfG No.209965
File: 1582499618605.jpg -(490248B / 478.76KB, 625x403) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. postmodernism / post structuralism
hello. I am mostly a theology and aesthetics person but I am getting deeper into modern philosophy and have a few questions.

A) why are most (all?) of the post modern and post structuralist philosophers I'm looking into viewed as marxist or as part of the larger domain of Marxism? I can't really make the connection between their ideas and Marx.

B) if I was interested in the connection between post-modernism / post structuralism and theology or aesthetics (obviously different fields), is there anything I should make sure I don't miss?

I'd appreciate any insight here a ton. honestly any youtube stuff would be great because i can watch or listen to videos while working but have to cram in reading which gets difficult.
3 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read.
Edwin Trotdock - Sun, 01 Mar 2020 00:14:47 EST fGHDtkRk No.209992 Reply
post-modernism largely rejects dialectical materialism, it's as influenced by Marx as it is by Plato, that is to say, clearly to some extent, but by no means is it a continuation of Marxism
Basil Lightspear - Thu, 25 Nov 2021 20:14:55 EST 4ndxRmBA No.210632 Reply
Marxism is a very significant part of post-structuralist thought. Gilles Deleuze has explicitly said in an interview with Antonio Negri "I think Félix Guattari and I have remained Marxists." Jean Baudrillard is also heavily influenced by Georges Bataille who has had a very prominent history in marxist circles before breaking off from them. Michel Foucault called himself a marxist as well.

All of these figures "break" from Marx in some way, but marxism remains heavily influential to the entire sector of post-structuralist philosophy.
Charlotte Fanhood - Mon, 29 Nov 2021 03:51:47 EST rfZ3px7W No.210633 Reply
I think you can look past these figures to Hegel too, right?

The Existence of Whiteness and White People

View Thread Reply
- Sat, 19 Aug 2017 01:46:29 EST UIYk/9cB No.208391
File: 1503121589960.png -(210781B / 205.84KB, 354x409) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. The Existence of Whiteness and White People
It should be obvious here that this is relevant to the events that occurred in Charlottesville, VA. I'm also assuming that the majority of people here consider themselves white, so it's also relevant in that regard. Also, it might be obvious that I'm not writing from the perspective of a white person. But I think it's worth asking anyway.

My questions are thus: in what way(s) do white people exist? And why does an ethnonationalist project (like the Nazi's, KKK, perhaps the alt-right) depend on a white identity?

Is white a race? An ethnicity? A skin tone? A set of cultural acts?

It seems to me that white people don't really exist for three reasons. One, you can easily substitute a "white" identity with an ethnic one. That is, you can identify yourself as Irish, Scandinavian, German, etc. I think that here, to identify yourself as white is a category mistake.

Second reason is a pragmatic one. Why should we insist on a white identity when so many other identities are better? Why can't you identify as a Starcraft 2 player, a metalhead, a juggalo, a frequent masturbator, etc.? I imagine that telling people that you're white has no reflection as to what you actually do or are. There's no need to hold on to a white identity when there are plenty that more accurately describe your being or group (and ethnicity is included here). Whiteness, in other words, is just an empty signifier.

The third reason is political and relates to the point about whiteness being an empty signifier. I think that it's because whiteness is an empty signifier that groups like the Nazis or the KKK are able to utilize and capitalize on it. Because it is an empty signifier, you can use it to mean whatever you want to mean. You can use the concept of "whiteness" against certain minorities (like the Jews in the case of Nazi Germany, like Mexicans in contemporary US).

This is why, I think, the left and the liberals failed horribly in the last election. The emphasis on the tolerance of minority groups and the fact that there is white privilege and therefore white people need to atone for their sin of being white has produced a political climate where people who identify as white become more radical and more extremist.

Hence it's no wonder that there was the rise of the alt-right and Donald Trump who were able to appeal to those who identified as white, since it was liberals are quick to demand that white people repent for their whiteness. Whiteness here is a trap that you can't get out of, because there's literally nothing you can do about being white except be guilty about it. And those who don't want to feel guilty about it are going to find ways to redeem that identity, such as the case in the alt-right. Now I'm not saying that a project toward greater equality should be abandoned, but I think that in order to get out of the liberal guilt trap of being white, it would be necessary to abandon a white identity.

tl;dr white people don't really exist and reinforcing this identity will only garner more extremist groups like the alt-right
37 posts and 5 images omitted. Click View Thread to read.
Betsy Fanstone - Sun, 07 Nov 2021 22:04:37 EST 43LYWyNb No.210629 Reply
The only thing you can do to break a chud is agree with them, but I think what you call alt-right ideology is just the result of western users being critical of recent events involving their leftwing.

Psychologically this isn't wrong, the association with race and culture is akin to those of family. Children do not inherit prejudice, however adults of similar races are more likely to cooperate with each other than with those they instictually consider foreign. There is the false assumption of agreement within their own color and physical characteristics, and no expectations with unfamiliar ones. This can quickly devolve into prejudice, once trauma or disrespect is introduced by a specific group more than another.

Pure racism however requires a break from rational thinking, it is simply untrue that the entirety of a race or culture can align with individual bias. It is false directional thinking that causes people to assume sharing one common trait should be understood as sharing the same family or tribe. By discussing these concepts we can eliminate the source of racial tensions rather than pretend there is some kind of "race war" occurring in the modern age. Equality isn't a game of tetherball, radicalism will only result in less understanding overall.
User is currently banned from all boards
Graham Cluffinghall - Mon, 08 Nov 2021 03:45:26 EST rfZ3px7W No.210630 Reply
1636361126142.png -(1552641B / 1.48MB, 803x1200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
The alt-right long ago consolidated into rebranded fascism
and/or white supremacist nationalism.
Are anyone actually civic nationalists?
Betsy Fanstone - Mon, 08 Nov 2021 16:42:52 EST 43LYWyNb No.210631 Reply
1636407772065.jpg -(76459B / 74.67KB, 576x1024) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
The concept of dividing legal boundaries by race is considered immoral and impractical to the majority of the free world. Modern supremacist ideals are not an issue of race, but instead one of social classes. Examples include how India's cast system favors those born into wealth, China's social credit favors those who serve the state, and Capitalism favors those who serve themselves. Each deciding who gets more care in a way that favors the most capable and/or useful. It is possible for someone raised in America to advance under China's system or vice versa, though less likely considering the standard is designed for a different cultural and mental make-up.
User is currently banned from all boards

Am I racist?

View Thread Reply
- Sun, 27 Oct 2019 02:43:08 EST cze3kJZ7 No.209815
File: 1572158588896.jpg -(252850B / 246.92KB, 1400x787) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Am I racist?
>I do not go out at night because i am afraid of being murdered by black guys.
>I do not go out at the day time because i am afraid of being murdered by white guys
24 posts and 4 images omitted. Click View Thread to read.
Reuben Facklenig - Thu, 07 May 2020 23:57:10 EST HIc9yngr No.210077 Reply
The op is "Is it racist?" Kinda sounds like an invitation to have an extended discussion about terms. Also racism has been built into the system here in the U.S. and it's taught to kids from a very young age. If you've ever lived in a place where the community focuses on ancestry rather than try to organize by skin color, you'd realize just how silly and pointless racism really is.
Walter Pebberlore - Sun, 31 Oct 2021 00:58:47 EST Z8WVcOKl No.210579 Reply
1635656327253.jpg -(43469B / 42.45KB, 640x360) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
All whites according to weev are holy and sacred and when a white man rapes a non white child that is good and holy too according to white supremacists

>White supremacists support pedophilia as long as it is white men raping non white children

Harmless Fun, Sudden Patriarchy

View Thread Reply
- Tue, 26 Oct 2021 01:49:10 EST liihox/C No.210563
File: 1635227350175.jpg -(420251B / 410.40KB, 2048x2048) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Harmless Fun, Sudden Patriarchy
Some lovely women on facebook having a nice time, probably Got reruns of a sec I’m going on in background, sipping wine, a bath and candles, maybe…

Report Post
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.