Be a neoliberal, except IRONICALLY xd *dabs*

...

Logic of Sense for stoicism. Nietzsche and Philosophy for a proper start. Any of his article and interview collections or the Abecedaire for an easier start.

You're not wrong, but Zizek is still great. And he understood more about Deleuze than might seem obvious from his books and articles. Listen to his EGS lectures, he explains the Deleuzian virtual using music quite well for example.

their praxis is explicit acceleration of neoliberalism to its doom. so they are neoliberals only ironically, like I said in OP.

Thank you very much

I enjoy Deleuze

link

You’d be surprised how many haven’t lol

Daily reminder that Deleuze likes rhizomes, and that the most common rhizomatic plant we eat are soy beans. Deleuze is literally preaching soyboy metaphysics. Wake up and smell the estrogen friends. He maybe be French, but that hard baguette of his isn’t a myth, he was a flaccid tofu sorry of guy who was compensating

Okay post it sideways now

Which one?

your moms dick is a rhizome fag

Difference and Repetition if you are interested on his "ontological" frame of thought. If not, the works that the other user told you seem good.

Just read conclusion : ^ )

why are you calling them neoliberals? they were totally socialists. there is something off with your neoliberalism concept.

He also hates the feeling of a cat rubbing against him as per interview vid. What kind of fucked up inhuman faggot would say something like that? I generally couldn't give a fuck about the personal lives of most philosophers but that one sentence put me off of him forever. He's fucking dead to me.

apparently he had a skin problem and he was partially being ironic

No problem. There's also a Youtube lecture by a Deleuzian about Deleuze and the Stoics. I think his name is John Sellars.

I honestly don't know where the accelerationism comes from. It is not, as far as I know, mentioned explicitly in AO, ATP or WIP, that is to say in their books together. Maybe it's a meme made by their disciples such as Negri or Land.

And nothing of value was lost.

But it is omnipresent in their work. What else does capitalist-neoliberal politics afford other than an illusory exit.

Even if that's the case, you could argue that for literally every author ever. Marx was clearly an undercover capitalist.

Yep. You can pretty much divide politics into two - neoliberals and anarcho-primitivists.

lol

t. Cat

You know, it is possible to do a reading of Deleuze with all the Landian procapitalist reading. In fact you can still do a Landian reading and not being procapitalistic (in fact Land would be quite opposed to neoliberalism. He is a collectivist. Right-wind─ but still. That's why he lives in China).

whitout* all the Landian

well I guess it has something to do with Badiou

man just be more rhizomatic and embrace both

Zizek is buttmad that D&G btfo psychoanalysis since his whole """philosophy""" is based on (an interpretation of) Lacan.
>Neoliberal
Is this the left wing version of "Jews"?

Take your politics and shove them up your fag ass, commie

>Don't insult my le pets x(

Back to r*ddit/fb

>Jews
Yeah, it's a great rethoritical device that rolls off the tongue without meaning much. As an added bonus there aren't any laws against calling for mass genocide of neoliberals, so I can shitpost legally.

Still not a single post in this thread giving evidence for Deleuze being neoliberal. The whole thesis of Difference and Repetition strikes out against the logic of exchange at the heart of neoliberalism. Keep watching your facebook videos of Zizek, undergrad cucks, or knuckle down and read some big boy philosophy.

I kek'd.

> right-wing collectivism

That's a thing? I'm intrigued... I just imagined Land as a neoliberal accelerationist going for sone kind of singularity type event.

dam, this Hannibal Lecter guy is pretty smart

They do at one point say in an interview something along the lines of there not being enough consumption in our consumerist society, but it just felt in context like one of their provocative formulas (we've never seen a schizophrenic, there is no such thing as metaphor, etc.) rather than a call for more of the same. The way I see it, the other user that mentions Badiou is rather correct. For his kind of approach, the fact that D&G talk on and on about possible "answers" outside of the state and external enforcement, might make them seem like some weird individualists without an ontological individual, but the fact is that even in the USSR you had various attempts at fundamentally changing "personal" desire production (even by changing human nature). They even went as far as to try a kind of techno-gnosticism (Zizek's phrase) where technology shows you your internal states and what subjective states they may give rise to (sadly they lacked the technology back then, but cognitivists today are trying again, even trying to make mobile automated antidepressant dispensers). Then again, the USSR also tried to make human - ape hybrids to use as slaves so...

>right-wing collectivism
>that's a thing
Yes, why wouldn't it be? It's the left wing that is concerned with the individual and their fetishes. The right wing care about family, country, in healthy and unhealthy ways ethnicity and sometimes race.

In a general type sense, not all right wingers of course

I get that, but collectivist usually refers to property organization (economy in the everyday sense) rather than to social values (and "libidinal" economy), which is what threw me off.

The left wing is inherently collectivist. On the right you get a mix of both, mostly because everything that isn't somehow derived from Marx is considered right wing nowadays. Look at anything within the fascist worldview for an example of right wing collectivism.

Anything left of high toryism is a waste of time

Sage and kys

I'm not American. I unironically joined the most neoliberal party in my country after reading D&G

What made you join?

Go to bed Roger Scrotum.

>There's no need to fear or hope, but only to look for new weapons.

definitively neoliberal

ironically*

what is neoliberalism?

a miserable pile of policies

> implying the gulag isn't the best weapon against shitposting

>irony is the best shitposting

There should be an entry questionnaire for posting on Veeky Forums

this desu, if i had a dollar for ever /pol/lack that whines about neoliberalism without knowing what neoliberalism is in the first place, I'd have money enough to find something else to do and leave this shit board forever

Him and Eric Andre are the contemporary D&G and the closest mankind has ever been to a true BWO

>The left wing is inherently collectivist
>mostly because everything that isn't somehow derived from Marx is considered right wing nowadays
This works for the left as well. "Linksliberale" left-liberals are a thing. You also have distributionism and competition-socialists. They are a small fraction of the left but to say the left is inherently collectivist is plain wrong

>I joined the neoliberal party in my country after reading D&G
>What made you join?
Yeah. Too bad he didn't say it you fucking retard.

After reading anti-oedipus I realised the validity of the JQ, and I became aware Charles Manson was an unfairly slandered and persecuted spiritual teacher. in short, I took the so called SIEGE-pill. NS revolution is the only solution, helter skelter was manson's prophecy of schizo hitlerist mongrel scumfuck uprising. we gotta do it.

I'm not sure what you mean by left liberal, but if it's anything like social democrats then it is indeed derived from Marxism and is very collectivist. From what I've seen, distributism generally is seen as right wing. And I'm not sure what competition-socialist is either, it sounds like a funny name for market socialists, who still believe in publicly-owned means of production.

Read the Turner Diaries if you haven't.

>I'm not sure what you mean by left liberal, but if it's anything like social democrats
No. Linksliberal is an established term here in Germany hence I included it in my post. I wasn't sure whether it'd be understood. Basically socially libertarian and economically liberal within a framework i.e. unions etc.

>distributism generally is seen as right wing
Why? I mean compared to socialism sure but compared to capitalism in the left. To clarify I'm talking about moderate left in the common understanding.

>And I'm not sure what competition-socialist is either, it sounds like a funny name for market socialists
Yeah lol I wasn't sure how to name it either. I hope the name speaks for itself though. They are basically socialists that realised socialism sucks.

tired: white nationalism, muh ethnostate and traditional values

inspired: Manson-Spontex Universal Genocide fight to the death Animal to Animal

youtube.com/watch?v=oo64nlKdA0k

Yknow i like the sound of that

Now this is shitposting. I was asking for details.