Recent Purchases/Stack Thread

Post yours.

In addidtion, the Canadian Firearms Safety Course manual. My PAL is so close I can taste the Cosmoline.

How the heck did you fit all that in your ass

No h8

Solzo, Dosto and neetchee are the top three there. Overall good stack for a Java user.

>Me Before You
>The Martian
What are you doing?

>What are you doing?
Enjoying reading instead of being a pseud.
What are you doing?

Magick

R8

I've read samples of The Martian and it makes Stephen King look like Cervantes. Also redd*t likes it, which is never a good sign.

...

falling for memes general

>CCNA
Why? A CCNA is literally worthless these days. I mean actually zero market value, except that it would be an edge getting a help desk job.

These and some others.

This is a pretty weird stack for me.

I just finished the murakami one and it was eh.

Also >manga

Don't know if I've posted these in one of the recent threads or not.

Also these. Won't be able to read letters for years. I've only read the floating opera.

what is valuable then? i'm a first year cybersecurity major but i haven't done anything relevant to my major yet, just getting gen-ed stuff out of the way in case i change my mind.

CISSP
CEH
GSEC

Don't go into InfoSec unless you're willing to sell your soul for the amount of work you'll have to do.

Been wanting a copy of the Chandler Napoleon for a few years now, got a good deal on it from my favorite used bookstore.

dope stack, however i suggest you avoid weeb shit and steelseries products

nice

> Me Before You
> the Martian

are you a girl

L-LON L-LONDON

Damn, i'm jealous, how much did it cost you overall?

...

> plushes and books on the floor
> floor is filthy

Degenerate

How much did The Consumer cost? I've been looking into buying a copy but I don't seem to be able to find one worth less than a few hundred dollars.

Never seen The Leopard in these threads before. It's absolutely great!

Kek, nice books though.
Also:
>mfw I searched your pic on google and the only result was a link to movie database
>ROOM tells the extraordinary story of Jack, a spirited 5-year-old who is looked after by his loving and devoted mother. Like any good mother, Ma dedicates herself to keeping Jack happy and safe, nurturing him with warmth and love and doing typical things like playing games and telling stories. Their life, however, is anything but typical--they are trapped--confined to a 10-by-10-foot space that Ma has euphemistically named Room. Ma has created a whole universe for Jack within Room, and she will stop at nothing to ensure that, even in this treacherous environment, Jack is able to live a complete and fulfilling life.

Okay soooo... what are you going to do, read all of those?

>reading
no one in this board reads books user, we all post ironically

>/pol/tier history books
>martian
>fucking Steve Jobs
>weeb trash
Oh this stash is actually good. Pros for Augustine.
>Lampedusa
Good taste.
>essential Veeky Forumscore
Not bad.
>alan moore
>colette
Spotted the femanon.
Another good stack.
>lovecraft meme
>weeb shit
This looks more like a bait.

Guess that's it by now. Anyway, keep reading imbeciles.

>/pol/tier history books

What does this even mean? What are some better history books to read?

>Not bad.
thanks famalam

It becomes /pol/tier when it's about Soviets or Hitler.

I want to buy 3 of these-- which one should I leave out?

>which one should I leave out?
Murakami

Nice stack. You seem interested in Italian poetry. Have you read Montale?

Things that I am going to guess
1) You will probably never read any of those books
2)You are nothing more than a poser who spends all his time playing video games

You remind a lot of this waste of oxygen I know named Ben. He should just kill himself

Where do you know this person from?

Took this yesterday, have since finished Breakfast of Champions, will be starting on Siddhartha soon.

I normally don't read multiple books at once but the Iliad is really damn dense and I went almost a whole month without touching it, so I decided I'd read some shorter, lighter books at the same time

>JG Ballard
I read High-Rise not too long ago, really enjoyed it. Not sure if it's included in that edition, but worth a read.

Like 25 bucks, i got them for someone leaving the country
>weeb shit
Fight me nerd
I doubt it, its only his short fiction.
But looking forward to reading it along with the drowned world in the future.

YO! I'm doing the firearms safety course as well! Get to go to the range today and start firing.

I'm waiting til December to buy anything, probably some Lispector and Arlt

I want to be a massive faggot and get a CSA VZ58.

Greekfag here, from top to bottom
>The Black Monk and Other Stories by Anton Chekhov
>The Sleepwalkers by Christopher Clark
>The Trial by Franz Kafka
>Meditations Pt 1 & 2 by Marcus Aurelius

Is Meditations published in the original Koine?

>Breakfast of Champions
How was it? I've heard good things.
Solid buys overall.

I enjoyed it for sure. Not as good as Cat's Cradle or Slaughterhouse Five, but still good. Very interesting structure

I've been looking for that set forever. How much it cost you user?

You Italian? Idk much about Napoleon, but if you're ever interested in the Revolution, read Lefebvre's histories on it (Coming of the French Revolution, for example). Nice stack 8/10

>Fagles Iliad
Is it a meme? I always see it at my uni's store. I need to read Iliad after I finish Odyssey, not sure which one to get, but I'm also planning to learn ancient Greek so might go for the Loeb. Nice stack though, I'm jealous of the Calvino. 7.5/10

Even though my mom's Greek, I can't read that. :'( 7/10 though for the Kafka

>lefebvre
After the marxist interpretation got btfo by the one two punch of Cobban and Furet? At least recommend Aulard over Lefebvre.

>Cobban and Furet
Dude, everything is social lmao! I'm just going to pretend I'm not categorising people into classes by saying it is 'the social'. Cobban was a retard, but didn't get time to read Furet.

yo mother fucker i know you're the one clearing value village of all the good books and leaving the garbage to us wagecucks who can only go into the store on the weekends. FUCKING NEEETSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

>Aristotle physics
Literally why

>ignoring the fact that Cobban literally goes down to primary documents to explicitly show that the "class" of nobility, etc didn't exist by the time of the French revolution
Get out of here illiterate

I've posted this here before.
this is my currently reading acquired within 2-3 years.
it's mostly military history, memoirs, war, history, etc. with two foreign language books.

out of this stack I'm reading:
Cacausian Battlefields-- Allen & Muratoff
Russian Fairy Tales-- Afansev
Last Empire: Fall of the Soviet Union.

I'll start with either Glantz's book next or Rock and Sand.

ahhhhhhh cheeki breeki v damke!

Hard Rain Falling is really good.

you havent read one of those books i bet

Wanted to get into Heidegger.

There weren't landed nobles in feudal France? You and Cobban are absurd. You try to controvert nearly all French historians, not just Lefebvre, when you say that. The nobles were anything from poor or rich (usually the latter were part of the upcoming bourgeois who were given titles by the king) and these were separated into 'robe' and 'sword'. It wasn't a "class" as we understand it today, but they were made domineering when they had their estate.

There were nobles but not the pigeonholed "privileged" class marxists love to masturbate about. But fundamentally to Cobban's point (and the revisionist movement as a whole) is that the social structure didn't change all that much for the average french citizen after the revolution. There was no great class overhaul, it was just a political coup.

I'm still working on it.

>privileged
Lefebvre explicitly says that nobles could be poor, but they enjoyed tax breaks, making them politically represented. It was privileged in the fact that the 'working classes' (peasants, sans culottes, etc.) had to pay for fucking everything. You're right though, it didn't end up as a class overhaul but class antagonisms (bourgeois, nobles, peasants were fighting the king and each other) allowed for the FR, and that's what I took away from Lefebvre.

Murakami

The French Revolution was a political coup. Nothing more nothing less. If it was any substantial class overhaul then it wouldn't have come full circle with Napoleon and formed a monarchy again.

I said the Revolution spawned from class-based interactions (whether philosophical, political, dissent, etc.). But I said it didn't result in class overhaul because the revolution was countered by something else. It's called a counter-revolution. Same thing happened with the Bolsheviks. That doesn't mean the class antagonisms didn't exist, and that the revolution didn't happen, just that it was sublated by the counter-revolution.

If your view is that it was class spawned but didn't have any effect on class then I've got news for you, you're suffering from the lens of ideology. Anything generated by something will seek to counter that which generated it.

Oh wait you're saying the bolsheviks were a counter revolutionary force in the russian revolution. You're a vacuous idiot, I'm done.

Class antagonisms is what underlies society, you fucking idiot. Muh "lens of ideology". Viewing something with any analysis is "ideology" now? You're the vacuous idiot.
>Oh wait you're saying the bolsheviks were a counter revolutionary force in the russian revolution.
They were. Please read a book by someone who wasn't a Stalinist fuckwit or liberal for once in your life. Lenin and the Bolsheviks performed a coup and shut down all moves towards socialism (Kronstadt, shutting down factory councils, political terrorism, opening of gulags, etc.)

>spawned from class-based interactions
The French Revolution stemmed far more from wild philosophical idealism at the time and was also influenced by the American Revolution. It was easy to intellectuals to mobilize a broad set of masses into committing brutalities when they had no real understanding of motivation themselves.

It wasn't a class struggle in the least. On the contrary, there wasn't really a defined class fighting a defined class. It was mostly just Enlightenment philosophy failing.

>They don't realise shilling liberalism is class-based interaction
>Where the fuck does the idea for "no kings, just citizens" come from if it isn't based in anti-classism
K.
> On the contrary, there wasn't really a defined class fighting a defined class.
I know you haven't read Sieyes, he clearly shows that this is happening. Even Rousseau does.

>Class antagonisms is what underlies society
Are you serious? Suggesting that society is composed of "class antagonisms" is short-sighted to say the least. There is no "proletariat". It doesn't exist in reality. If you were to attempt to divide, let us say, America into "classes" you would have so many sub classes within classes that the entire system of categorization would be rendered completely insane and pointless by the end of it all.

I told you to read Forgotten Soldier like 3 months ago you lazy ass nig.

It does. It's called "employers" and "employees". Of course, there can be uber rich employers, and a small business owner, but that's why it's a spectrum, like it was with the nobles.
>sub classes
You're being the postmodernist now, if you haven't realised.

>K.
>no kings just citizens = anti-classism
Wat.

Kings weren't a social class in the Marxist viewpoint. That concept was nonexistent. Marx attempted to fatally divide society into nonexistent realities that held no actual meaning because they were rooted entirely in materialism which is not the way the majority of human beings relate their lives too.

>he clearly shows that this is happening
And yet it clearly isn't. Modern nations do not have social classes fighting against social classes, they have a wealth of other battles going on. You can't even divide people into the categorization that you could have 100 years ago. There was an information revolution that had nothing to do with social class and even less to do with social divisiveness.

>It's called "employers" and "employees"
That isn't a social class those are methods of employment within the system we exist in.

>spectrum of classes that contradict one another
So a convoluted invented mass of nonsensical "Classes" that are rooted in a hypocritical hybrid of abstraction and materialist principles that realistically has nothing to do with concepts of "class warfare" but rather a myriad of other concepts.

>like the nobles
Depends on your society. The Polish "szchlata" for example were far more like the early conceptions of "Citizen" that reflected more Plato's conception of a "Guardian".

There was no conception of economic "Class" involved in this whatsoever. The same could be said in other societies based on hierarchies of blood born and landed titles.

Work got in the way.

Fucking amazing book don't put it off fag

Blood in the Snow is a fantastic complement to that as well.

>Kings weren't a social class
You haven't read any Marx, you absolute doink. Kings are the apex of a class hierarchy, thus "the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles."
>not grounded in reality
>because we're not materialist
What? What is reality then? Are we going to get into epistemology now? Or are you a dualist historian?
>That isn't a social class those are methods of employment within the system we exist in.
Jesus christ, owning property makes you a part of the social class called "employer," "bourgeois," "aristocrat," etc. (but there aren't any more of the last). Employment is everything to do with class - it is the first and last thing class is. Define "social class," because it sounds like you want to break down into sub social classes to a point where it's meaningless itself. Oh, everything happens because a self-identifying male Christian something-rather did X and a female-identifying Buddhist something-rather did Y.
>Spectrum
How is this contradictory? Simply saying there are little fish and big fish, or failed capitalists and successful ones, doesn't contradict class. Stop trying to exaggerate what I'm saying. Generally speaking, the class of employer and employee are fighting over representation in politics - but there are some rich employees who vote for the rich to become richer, whilst there are small business owners who want to stop tax breaks for the rich, etc. These are outliers, and I don't pretend all capitalists are greedy corporations (but most are). There are some who just run a restaurant to feed their family.

Not viewing something through a lens is ideology. Being so consumed with a single lens that you can't examine things outside of that one context is. Fuck I don't even like Zizek but he makes a good point with that. If you're so consumed in an ideology you can't see the glaring faults in its overuse it really is pointless to talk to you.

Also I'm not a stalinist. Bolshies can very easily be argued to have just undergone a zealous purge against any potential hazards to the implementation of the communist state. Don't tell me you're a lost cause Makhnovist now too. Because then we're just going to run around in circles.

>Kings are the apex of a class hierarchy
Have you ever read about monarchies? Kings were one element of the governing aspect of the Monarchist system. Kings represented more of mans conception at formulating Law than it was a fucking "class struggle".

>epistemology
Those discussions have no ending.

>owning property
And yet examples exist to prove that property ownership was not always the way in which you projected influence and power. There were landless nobility.

>because it sounds like you want to break down into sub social classes to a point where it's meaningless itself.

Because it is a meaningless term to use at large. The fact that there exists already sub classes within your conception of class makes the entire of class a waste of time and worthless endeavor because of the constant conflicting nature of these so called "classes".

You have this alleged "land owning ruling class" with non-landowners belonging to it who had not even a man to command.

>little fish and big fish
That isn't defining a "class system" that is defining a form of existence in nature in which larger, stronger forces have the ability to more easily overcome smaller, weaker forces. That isn't representative of class whatsoever.

>failed capitalists and successful ones
Going into business is nothing new to the concepts of "capitalism". And failing in that regard is not indicative of any form of social class.

>but there are some rich employees who vote for the rich to become richer

Which still does not prove that social classes exist. You are just saying that some individuals have a desire to secure their own isolated base of power by voting in a system that allows for them to do this. That isn't saying they are a "social class" because then you would have to suggest there was some unifying "class interest" when there clearly isn't.

>Kings are the apex of a class hierarchy, thus "the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles."
Wow nice job you literally got him to start thumping his Marx like it was a biblical text.

>this is your brain on ideology

For fun mostly .Need Screwtapes Toast. Really liked Strange&Norrel. Enjoying Wicked.

>thumping his Marx like it was a biblical text.

All of them are the same indoctrinated type that cannot look at human history from any other perspective than the one that they were force fed. It is sad really but there is hope to break the chains yet.

I recommend "A History of Poland" which will blow the Marxist concept of "muh noble social classism class warfare" to smithereens.

Which history? The one by Adam Zamoyski

You didn't read anything I said. Goodbye, sorry for shitting up a stack thread.

...

Yeah, it was a really enjoyable read. Yes it is focused ENTIRELY on a broad historical analysis of Poland but reading about the "szlachta" which was the nobility of Poland is absolutely fascinating. Like I said, Marxist clearly never heard of this or he probably would have found his own ideas to be the self-defeating mess they actually are.

When confronted with concepts outside of his narrow Marxist materialist worldview he shuts down. They all shut down. This is why the only way Marxism was ever able to manifest itself was through mass violence and killings. It was the ultimate Nihilistic expression of self-annihilation.

Mikhail Tukhachevsky, the Bolshevik commander of the Red Army that invaded Poland. From the book "Warsaw 1920" by the same author, Zamoyski:

"... after a lengthy discussion on literature, he would delcare that all books should be burnt so that the soul of man could be truly liberated. One day a French captain found him building a grotesque cardboard monster holding a bomb, which he explained was the God of War and Destruction, Pierun. 'We will enter into the state of Chaos, and will only emerge from it with the total ruin of civilization...'"

Truly a charming lot of bright young men.

>I say the Bolsheviks were counter-revolutionary
Ha! Look how shitty this Bolshevik was! You're all so disgusting.
>They all shut down!
Why would I want to argue with you fucking idiots when you respond to half a sentence at at time? You also didn't bring anything up. It's also bad for a stack thread.

>10:04

lerner should be discussed on here more often, that novel rocks

>Look how shitty this Bolshevik was! You're all so disgusting.

It was a Bolshevik after all who shit up the thread to begin with.

10/10 stack

I'm not a Bolshevik, you idiot. I just bought State and Revolution by Lenin because I have a course on Soviet Russia next year. I've been the one arguing this entire time, doink. I know it's an anonymous board, but holy shit, can you follow a convo?

I don't think it's a meme, it reads pretty well, but I couldn't say how accurate it is.

Yeah I'm really looking forward to reading Calvino, it'll be my first. I think all the newer editions of his books look great

recently bought 1984 and do androids dream of electric sheep. now reading 1984. though i haven't continued Gödel.

Strange and Norrell is one of my favorites, I love it

Damn I'm lucky I already copped that a while back. I'll bump it up on my reading list then, thanks user.

Read Nonexistent Knight if you haven't already. Very charming and funny.

Pretty nice stack, what's the Bradbury book, can't see the title. Was gonna buy Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? for my dad, tell me what it's like. He loves Blade Runner, but I heard the book is much weirder/deeper.

its fahrenheit 451. haven't read electric sheep yet since I'm preoccupied reading 1984. though my friends recommended me this book. and I've heard it takes a deeper approach on human empathy and can a robo t(aka replicant) have empathy? can a robot have more humanity than a human? (with the whole i think therefore i am thing) which the blade runner didn't have that as it's main theme.

thats great! when do you finish high school?

1984 is the only high school tier book, Fahrenheit 541 was alright imo (even for a """dystopic""" text).

I don't know, I definitely got that from Blade Runner, and that's not what the cogito is about (but I know it's mistaken a lot commonly). Spoiler: Decker is a replicant, and the whole film is about how he can love, have memories, etc.

451* lol

>godel
>the republic
>high-school tier

my man you need some glasses

>It's called "employers" and "employees"

I'm sorry you've been memed into shilling broken kike ideology when you could be using your brain to play online checkers