Reading all those books made you smarter, right?

Reading all those books made you smarter, right?

Let's see, what is your political ideology?

Classical Liberal
I know, I won the game, because it is literally and objectively the best possible political system as of now.

no.

Marxism

>political ideology
>ideology
wew
bub
I've got some books for ya

(Small c) conservative. Oakeshottian, specifically.

>conservative
What exactly are you trying to conserve?

i don't have one

I'm Apolitical if you want to use the special snowflake label.

>Liberal
>Smart

What?

I consider myself Luddite following a deep, burning passion for Jacques Ellul, Norbert Elias and Martin Heidegger.

I'm genuinely disgusted.

The more I read, particularly books explicitly concerning political science and essays also concerning political science, the further away I am from a conclusion. The more I realised there were complex specifications that I was ignorant about previously, and then I would start contemplating afresh from the new basis of information I would establish. From new conclusions, I would pursue more knowledge, and in doing so I'd realise that there's still patchwork to be done.

I currently see various political ideologues indifferently, but it's inarguable some have more coherent and well-informed ideologies than other. It's also quite hilarious how /pol/'s consensus lacks self awareness in that it always criticises an inability on the part of leftists to overlook severe cognitive bias and 'double standards' when their entire substance is fixated on the basis of double standards and selection bias

I believe things can and may change for the better in future, but not through the hand of universalist nor reactionary ideals i guess. I find nationalism healthy to an extent idk

>all that build up
>pol bashing
>le nationalism XDD

No, I'm not calling you a nazi or assuming that nationalism is a bad thing, it's that, simply using the word "nationalism" means nothing without proper context, not to mention "to an extent" which is arbitrary to say the least.

Popolarismo

I was hoping people would infer that I meant identifying with a tribe rather than identifying with the ideology of wholesome egalitarianism and universalism as nationalism is today's closest and most tangible rendition of tribalism, and I don't see what part of 'to an extent' you don't get, nationalism is healthy in that it creates social cohesion and incentivises greater productivity, but like everything else that is a societal supplement, if it is over-exercised inimical effects manifest quickly

It's best to be neutral, aka look out for your best interests in acquiring capital to sustain a happy life, while bypassing the traditional system as much as possible and literally giving as little care possible to external factors outside of ones ability to change without great effort such as politics.

There's little benefit in being steamed up about things these days.

>political ideology
holy shit you're spooked. there's nothing more toxic than an ideology. except, of course, real toxic.

>he thinks he can be free of ideology
Also spook is a silly term for "indoctrination".

Marxism
>everyone is lower middle class
>one single dictator lives in a grand palace and feeds us all in a breadline
>schools have degraded to the point where they are not difficult, and challenge is non-existent
>you don't have to work alot or do anything too hard
This is literally the political equivalent of laying in bed at your parents house and your mom brings you Marie Callendar's precooked meals and you don't have to go to work because your mom doesn't want those boys bullying you anymore and she still gives you kisses because you make bad grades. Marx literally tucked an entire generation into bed and brought them hot soup at 2 PM when they were waking up (using literally in the informal sense here).

0/10 for effort m8

I liked it desu

Yes, though it should be noted inaction complete, results in being eventually cornered and snuffed. Devil's hands et al.
I'm currently thriving under the decree of the ways of samurai-Buddhism. While in the youthful years it best to identify your enemy and passively but decisively restrict their motions, growth. In later times with wisdom, not strength, may philosophy be your withering.

>Luddite
>Does not know Unabomber
Seriously, kill yourself

I know Ted Kaczynski, I did read his manifesto. I don't what are these “songs” you're talking about. Would you mind explain me?

Anarchist I guess, I long for a total decentralization of power in small, autonomous enclaves (the citizens of which should receive a thorough political education, in order for them to consciously partecipate to the "tribe" decision making) ruled by assembly, in constant comunication with each other (to this end, there is a lot to be said about the possibilities of Internet) and with a complete freedom of movement for their citizens, truly liquid borders. In order for this society to be functional, a number of pre-existing conditions are to be met: the possibility of learning to be de-istitutionalized and open sourced, private (not personal) property abolished, access to information for everybody...

In short, I was inspired by Bey's notions of TAZ and "Pirate Utopias", as well as the role of information exchange in the creation of autonomy, by Democratic Confederalism and by my experiences with leftist political movements and their ways of retaking autonomy on a smaller scale. If any of you knows any read that would help me flesh out these ideals, I'd be grateful to have it namedropped - I was thinking about reading Ocalan.

I became interested in politics a year ago and for the first few months I essentially held basic social democrat views sort of because those were the easiest to defend and seemed pretty moderate (and are the status quo here in the UK).

A few months ago I've slipped into what I think is relativism. I have zero opinions as I'm aware I haven't done enough reading to properly formulate any -- and even if I did do research, I feel it's unlikely I'd develop any hard-line stances. If I went to /pol/ a year ago I'd be horrified. Now my reaction is "eh they could be right, they could be wrong, who knows?"

How does one exit this hole?

Leftist, sometimes authoritarian but liberal when it comes to the individual.

Typical SJW

>who knows
Reality?

> thinking that SJW isn't just a meaningless buzzword at this point

>buzzword
Not it isn't

mein gott
e
i
n

g
o
t
t

Then why did you use it like a buzzword?

I don't.

I can't believe how some people could actually support social justice, what a dreadful thing.

buzzword is a buzzword

I hope you're being sarcastic because if you aren't then you simply don't know enough about the subject.

...

I'm genuinely delighted.

I don't have a political ideology, nor do I want one.

t. numale

Nobody here has actually read Marx.

But you did.

Even the people who did, if they have a single thought in their head, aren't Marxist.

you don't have to read Marx to be a Marxist

how many christians do you know that have read the bible?

numales are actually SJW apologists/useful idiots

you lack self awareness

You lack many things.

i'm a leftcom desu.

you don't lack the ability to project hard

Not him but do you seriously believe that?
"social justice" sounds appealing but it's not as good as it sounds.

what does that mean

You still lack many things.

>Apolitical

itt: people who participate in protests

It means relativism isn't all that magical, we still live in physical reality that obeys certain rules.

I went to a bunch of those Occupy protests way back when but mostly kept quiet and observed. The opinions were all over the place and the most vocal were the homeless.

so you're saying for many things there *is* an answer? would 'nihilism' have fit my description better?

It's a difficult one but I am genuinely apolitical. Conservatives are self interested hypocrites. Liberals(not yank meaning) are insufferably smug and pretend not to have ideology. muh pragmatism. Social democrats are too pussy to be proper socialists and are chained by conventional thought. Socialists communists and anarchists lack self awareness, think they hold a monopoly of morality. They have the pretence of intellectualism but more often than not are ignorant of their own theory and can be absurdly dogmatic. Saying this i do have a soft spot for(20th century)Marxist thought. Easily the most rigorous, wide ranging and incisive political analysis

best answer itt

Okay so is Veeky Forums just bait or are you guys actually this bad at pretending to be smart?

>using zizek as 'ideology es spook' maymay
Zizek's position is that claiming to be free of ideology is itself a manifestation ideology.

So who are you going to vote for? No one? Just choose not to choose? You have input whether you like it or not. Not voting is letting someone else vote for you. Pretty sad.

>too much books and ideology
Where is the practical part of your ideology?
Didn't you know that politics involves action and propaganda?

muh democracy

>Complete Ad hominem
What's your primary aim when you are voting for a presidential candidate?

>Marxism is based on axioms and pseudoscience
>"sounds right for me :D"
What's your purpose?

Nobody in this thread mentioned their purpose when choosing an ideology.

What a bunch of pseudo-intelectuals.

Meritocratic Democratic Socialism

>muh democracy

More often than not, the purpose is evident in the ideology (provided you spend a few words on it). I posted and I'm fairly sure you can understand what my aims are, by reading what I identify myself as and how I wish society to be. Unless you want some copypasted, miss Universe kind of answer like "I chose this because I think people are equal and connected on an ontological level and anarchism is what could bring us closer to that state" which, incidentally, is what I believe but adds little to nothing to the discussion of politics, I think.

...

Counter progressive leftists.

And what's the practical part of that branch of your ideology?

What exactly are you asking? I quoted my (admittedly, non perfect) explanation above, which is practical. Are you asking me what are the practical consequences of my belief humans are equal on an ontological level? I've already answered, again, above, as anarchism follows my belief as the way to turn it into praxis.

>political ideology
>doesn't post a web quiz

fuck if i know now.

if I could start university again this is exactly what I'd do

No, I asked you what kind of method does your favourite book mention; it's implied that marxism needs a military phase.

Someone like that miss U you quoted before would choose any "believable" book as long as it has a text: "everyone lived happy forever" attached to it.

I can't give you a satisfactory answer to that question, I'll admit - I see the limits of my knowledge in the matter, both theoretically and practically. There are plenty of movements who tried (and still try) to achieve autonomy via militancy, with various degrees of succes - which are consequences of the sociopolitical situation they find themselves, the history of their geographical region, the authority they're fighting, etc. I don't think I can speak with any authority for or against any of them, as I lack the experience and raw knowledge to make my statements worthwhile. In the end, my words on the topic (like those of many others) would wind up being, on some level or another, bullshitting. That, though, it's no excuse: I may now lack these "requirements", but I can always work towards gaining them.

To answer your question in a very limited way, I believe the first step of militancy to be aggregation and networking (both online and physically), the retaking of various day-to-day activities from the monopoly of authorities (food production and education are two good examples, I feel, in Western countries), the creation of a shared political identity to be a basis for future efforts... My "favourite book" advocates for Artistic Terrorism, which is a fancy way to describe the creation of artistic products that affirm vitality and locate themselves outside of a fixed industrial-artistic environment, which I believe to be a nice strategy to create a habit of free thinking but, ultimately, a divertissement. Further than that, I repeat my idea that, as of now, I can only give uncultured and baseless opinions; if someone was to advice me on reads that'd help me on this side of things, I'd be grateful.

Cynicism

Hyperfacist

A new age will be born in the blood of the next war and goverment will once again be based on aesthetics

Together we will proclaim this new era by a symbolic turning of the valves and hammering of anvils

The spirit of western man will once again be dominated by vitality and speed

And we will all be drawn out of the pyramidic structure of old into a circle slowly rotating around the gravity of our new and blessed leader

>what is your political ideology
>your

Not a smart question OP.

>I can't give you a satisfactory answer to that question, I'll admit - I see the limits of my knowledge in the matter, both theoretically and practically. There are plenty of movements who tried (and still try) to achieve autonomy via militancy, with various degrees of succes - which are consequences of the sociopolitical situation they find themselves, the history of their geographical region, the authority they're fighting, etc.
All of this is implied in politics. That's why some arguments against marxism, are based on history discordance circumstances.
> I don't think I can speak with any authority for or against any of them, as I lack the experience and raw knowledge to make my statements worthwhile. In the end, my words on the topic (like those of many others) would wind up being, on some level or another, bullshitting. That, though, it's no excuse: I may now lack these "requirements", but I can always work towards gaining them.
This is implied when you post a comment on Veeky Forums.

>aggregation and networking
That's a good method, though.
>retaking of various activities from the authorities
How?

>Fixed industrial-artistic environment
How does that work?

How is the life of a man when their state is based on marxism?

I don't care about politics, I just want to read books

Mind you, I'm not advocating for Marxism, nor I claim any knowledge on the supposed workings of Marxist state.

>How?
Limiting myself to those examples I posted: growing of own crops, breeding of own livestock - to be shared/bartered with others who do the same, on a small, homegrown scale (on the side of some other activity) or on a larger one, essentially removing distribution and globalized mass market from the community; as for instruction, a de-institutionalization would take place by, again, removing oneself from places such as universities and systems like degrees, replacing them with a focus on the individual's own skills and knowledge, gained by self-instruction. Admittedly, I can see a lot of flaws in this part of my thinking, and should try to sit down and thoroughly amend them.

>How does that work?
Pic related, though you may want to read the whole book (TAZ and other essays).

>This is implied when you post a comment on chan.
But it's useful to remember, from time to time.

> I can see a lot of flaws in this part of my thinking, and should try to sit down and thoroughly amend them.
Because all of what you said "sounds" good. But it has no practical method nor economical basis.
When a radical movement is being executed, and shatters the old model, the consequences are always horrible due to lack of experience and economical circumstancial discordance.

>Pic related
Looks like an inspirational elitist book like "Thus spoken Z". Lamentably, I don't read many books.

>But it's useful to remember, from time to time.
I agree.

This is how you do it

How do you do it?
What Marxist book have you read?
What's the main topic you talk about when you are getting pussy?
Just for research purposes.

>political ideology

Literally just a bunch of different ways to combine spooks

Marxism

This, I cant believe any educated individual can believe in a mechanism of state that is the answer to every man's needs.