What's a good name for the critical post-marxist distancing from left wing politics and notions of cultural "progress"...

The board is overwhelmingly leftist. You are a minority and will die out, much like the white race over the course of the 21st century. Good day, comrade.

Define Marxist

>Eating b8 this obvious

You're the only one who responded, fag.

This is b8 but there faggots who unironically think this. You leftist fags are just as bad as the pol faggots with all your spooks. Lit is a postmodern board no metanarratives allowed

No
>inb4 phone poster

It's not bait. I meant it and it's the truth.

Wrong. Veeky Forums is a african etnonationalist board

That second person was after your response.

Alright my guy since you're convinced I'm samefagging who do you suggest we talk about instead of clouscard et al

Alright stop derailing please this is an actual decent thread for once

>willfully seeing a bait as an example of what you already believe in

No it's not.

I thought lit was catholic integralist? That's why I'm here.

What's a good starting point with him?

Well it had the potential to be one

Stop derailing the thread, faggots. Read Clouscard and stop enabling the neo-fascist paradigm of neo-liberal vs boogey man idiot "far-right" nationalism.

Fine, I'll read Couscard.

This
.Le complexe d'Orphée or his first book on Orwell.

wut are u on about

What's he say? Doesn't look to be translated.

>parrots and /pol/ derail a thread about post-modern pseudo reactionary theorists who deconstruct techno-capitalism
WOWOWOW really makes you think!

What are these books about? Also seems to be lacking in translations.

I'd say Realm of Lesser Evil, at least because it's translated into english and even liquid man likes it.

I think naming them adds more spooks to sift through, just let them be I guess

op here, that's a fair assessment. The only reason I was asking is I want more, do you have any recommendations for others? it being in French is not a problem

He thought Freudo-Marxism (his term) of Reich, Marcuse, Deleuze & Guattari, along with the general may 68 boomer zeitgeist, enables a new paradigm he calls neo-fascism, which is simply neo-liberal vs dumb boogey man nationalism. The latter is held up as a threat but they're not really that intelligent or a problem for the system. In this way you don't really have a meaningful choice. Everything is permitted but nothing is possible. It's like having to choose between Trump or Hillary, Macron or le Pen.

His other work is a critique of what he calls capitalism of seduction (we've arrived at a service economy and it's very easy to create needs to and then create a service to cater to the need). Part of Clouscard's thinking is a need to critique orthodox Marxist dogma, which he thinks can end up serving capitalism as soon as Marxists stop thinking in truly dialectical ways (rigidly clinging to orthodoxy is a form of non-dialectical thinking for him, an easy example being how nationalism can in some instances be a tool to resist globalization, although he was far from being a nationalist). Basically, sometimes we ought to invert Marxist dogma ,and there's nothing wrong with this because that's what dialectical thinking is all about, we simply have to remain conscious of that fact and most Marxists forget to do this.

What I have read makes him a lot more interesting and perceptive than anything Zizek, Jameson or Harvey farts out. And definitely more interesting that Derrida and Foucault.

Interesting fact, Sartre disliked him. I take that as a sign that he was on to something...

I highly recommend Paul Piccone, the founder of Telos Press (it went to shit after he died). Very interesting Marxist thinker who became highly critical of orthodox Marxism.

There's Pasolini and Georges Sorel. Carl Schmitt has some interesting things to say for any anti-liberal left winger.

This sounds like very standard critical theory stuff. I mean, for someone criticizing the 68ers, the man seems to have a very simiular outlook as that of the situationists.
I'm only replying because I had never seen this lad mentioned, started reading a Girard book in which he's mentioned today and now see this thread.

It seems like standard critical theory because he was one of the first to say this and since then he's been plagiarized heavily (Zizek, I'm looking at you) He's so prescient that he pre-empts Angela Nagle being called far-right by the left because she dared to critique tumblr.

His outlook isn't really similar to the situationists but I can see how you could think that. And everyone knows late Debord is best Debord.

Girard is a cool thinker, hope you enjoy him. Politically, I'm not sure where you go with Girard. Why not say mimetic theory is standard theory stuff? Or that Girard is "too simple?"

If he was one of the french pomo thinkers, he was at least 20 years late for the critical theory part, but I'll give him a read anyway, seems interesting. Anywhere I should be starting with? Also, I don't see how it's productive to name post-war capitalism as neo-fascism, I'm very weary of the indiscriminate use of the word, as it tends to turn "fascism" into a (a)moral situation. Idk I've been drinking since the afternoon so it's kinda difficult to organize my ideas.

What you are taking about in doesn't sound that far off from the Dialectic Of Enlightment and Adorno and Horkheimer wrote that shit in the fucking 40s when Clouscard was still a teenager.

>Paul Piccone
after looking around a bit he seems pretty awesome, thanks user

There's a handful of his essays on booksc. Telos Press charge an arm and a leg for his books now. Sad!

u should read Christopher Lasch
thezeitgeistmovement.se/files/Lasch_Christopher_The_Culture_of_Narcissism.pdf

Michea is highly influenced by Lasch.

Lasch is great. I'd recommend Revolt of the Elites and True and Only Heaven.

>thezeitgeistmovement.se/files/Lasch_Christopher_The_Culture_of_Narcissism.pdf
thanks user checking it out now

>a good name for the critical post-marxist distancing from left wing politics and notions of cultural "progress" that borders on reactionary?
a faggot, like OP

I don't like Clouscard because I don't border on reactionary at all, but I have to admit he looks like a fucking angel.

what's the antithesis to this? any post marxist writers who are progress obsessed bluehaired sjws as far removed as possible from anything remotely reactionary?

>progress
>reactionary
What does this mean? The very foundation of all leftism (and modern conservatism) is based on "muh progress". The only way to reject progress is to be a reactionary, isn't it?

how do you guys deal with sjw shit irl?

how do you guys deal with decent empathetic human beings irl?

Came in here to recommend Lasch, wasn't disappointed.

Clouscard seems reactionary to contemporary leftists, but he argues that it's these contemporary leftists, these Freudo-Marxists, who are anti-progress and anti-revolution.

what? you can still be fundamentally for an idea of progress, while critiquing common forms of "progess", you know? adorno and the like were often called reactionaries because they had an extremly pessimistic idea of "progress" and a very narrow definiton of what could be considered true progress, but that doesn't mean you have to throw the whole idea out of the window. This whole idea of either you have to accept all progress or become a luddite reactionary that hates all progress is total brainlet ideology.