Why is it ok on Veeky Forums to debate obvious left wing philosophers and authors...

How is creating ( and believing in the possibility you can create ) an actual utopia a serious position?

Because the true utopia is believing the current systems of organization are sustainable in the face of its own interior contradictions and exterior crises

Provide an alternative then.

ah yeah, he wrote How to Read Lacan so I messed that up

If you think left wing threads aren't filled to the brim with shitposting (and I'll give it to the authors, it's often more interesting and varied than "gb2pol") you're seriously deluded.

You can't get a serious discussion going about any political position, as the large mojoraity of those who partecipate in the conversation have never read the books/writers that are being discussed and either post inanities or derail the discussion. The rare times a thread managed to be worthwhile were when only a handful of anons were involved over the course of several days, with no significant exteral intervention - the influx of posters from other boards lately has exacerbated the already present tendency to get carried away by political shtiflinging, so you won't find a worthwhile discussion in here.

name one obvious lefty philosopher discussed here as much as zizek

It's because any 'leftist' debates on Veeky Forums don't center around the most cromagnon opinions held by the extreme left (political correctness, guilt complex, etc.), whereas most of the threads on here that stem from a right-wing mindset do in fact concern such extremeism (le Blacks n' Jewz r bad, reactionary anti-feminism) and seem to just be an excuse to shitpost

Democratization of large firms, centralized control of productive resources

Marx, structuralists and post-structuralists in general, all enlightenment philosophers.

Good assessment of the situation

That would be realism.
The current society is real. It's there. It has its flaws, just like everything else in reality.

And everything dies. We on the right are the first to admit civilizations collapse.

Why this need for permanence? Why this desire for a final solution to it all? Why not manage what is manageable instead of these insane utopic fantasies?

which rightist philosophers would you like to see?

I don't know about "as much as Zizek" but most any of the modern French tradition, Marx himself, Chomsky if you consider him a philosopher all get discussed regularly

You tried that a century ago. Multiple times.

>categorizing philosophers as left and right wing

if the notable philosophers were so simple that you could split them into such a basic dichotomy, their ideas would be so simple that they wouldn't be noteworthy.

That would be realism.
My current medical situation is real. My cancer is there. My body has its flaws, just like everything else in reality.

And everyone dies. We on the right are the first to admit mortallity.

Why this need for permanence? Why this desire for a final solution to it all? Why not manage what is manageable instead of these insane utopic fantasies?

Not him, but that is actually a pretty good question - I'd argue it's not about reaching an utopia or a final solution, but about changing what surrounds us now and here, through multiple means; furthermore, I believe there shouldn't be an ideal society as some kind of monistic political thing, but that society should be as flexible and bondless as possible to react appropriately to anything that endangers it. Sorry, I'm not that articulate now but I'm Italian and tired, hope I made myself clear.

Try fail, try again, fail better

Ehhh.. You can heal a person, but not save him from death no?

Exactly so what is the difference, you don't see many Leftists claiming to know the way to end entropy do you?

>entire societies ( with millions of people ) are a laboratory to make my dream world a reality

This is why petty bourgeois fucks need to be kept in place.

Ideal theorising is done on the right as well. Whether it should be done or not is a different matter.

I don't really care personally.

It does seem like Evola in particular is pretty much impossible to actually discuss.

Veeky Forums is not a place for serious discussion.

Why shouldn't he be, he's a joke

But they fucking do.
Communism is supposed to be the end of history. It will, supposedly, lead to us transcending the inner contradictions and bring about a homeostasis of some sort on a social, economic and political level.

A lot of those regimes were actively suppressed by American intervention, either from direct military involvement, funding counter-revolutionary juntas, or imposing sanctions

youtube.com/watch?v=A61DqjKKQak

I remember in 2008, when still in college, folks were raving about Chavez.

Hehe.

Wew lad

Even when proposing this position you're not proposing that people will stop dying or that civilization is somehow a stable thing.
The funny thing is that its the Neo-Liberal right that has been most famous to claim the end of history lately

>why does your system fail
>capitalist conspiracies

Funny.
I thought conspiracies were for right wing nutjobs?

Thats the point of the image

Why do you think that? I think especially his religious and hermetic writings are very interesting, but it would be totally impossible for me to discuss it.

It's not all bad though, I have had some decent discussion on for example Eliade, though that might be because he's not as well known.

My utopian society will come to fruition once the evil capitalist pigs get out of the way!!! That is the ONLY roadblock remaining!

The difference between Right and Left wing conspiracies is that the Left wing ones are historically documented covert plans while Right wingers scream about flourine and vaccines

Civilization, by its very nature, is unstable. To even conceive of civilization as a "finished" system is a lunacy I'll leave to leftists to believe.
The mythologies of the premodern era were well aware a civilization is to be carefully tended against the forces of primordial chaos.

I'm not even a neoliberal. I don't even get wild about the "free market". I see it for the utopianism it is as well.

But you really are a bunch of Manichean religious fanatics. I really agree with Zizek, but on a whole other level. You're just Christians, but without the theism.

Because you fuckers CONSPIRE in the first place.

Because being left wing is the current trend in the western world, just like in all ages anyone who goes against this zeitgeist will encounter huge conflict

The main core of it is social, people are left wing because their hip friends are and if youre a leftist you get points within your social circle and can signal moral vanity to others around you

Not really a conspiracy when the information is all readily available to the public via declassified CIA documents completely delineating America's direct involvement in dozens of fledgling communist/socialist nations in the 20th century

but the image tries to express the point that socialist government is impossible because someone will always stop it. If a powerful nation post-coldwar attempted it, the results may not be the same

Jews dominating finance and the media is also easy to find out.

But apparantly an ethno-religious minority having a disproportionate presence is politically incorrect to mention... Or has the same effects if you had Christian whites there.

This has nothing to do with anything I've written....

I don't know, or really care for that matter, but a few nights ago I had the most wonderful dream of my young life. I was on the upper balcony of the Chilean Royal Palace with Pinochet hitting golf balls into the dirty favelas below. It was the closest thing to love I had ever felt.

youtube.com/watch?v=wWraETdCFWI

I HAVE THE DOCUMENTS

And so what if we are?
There was a great deal in the Christian message which is why Zizek discusses it at length. And it was a message that did spread and significantly change the Western World.
A message of a brotherhood of men, not being enslaved to possessions and an embrace of the neighbour. Its better to have a commitment to finding a path towards these hopes.

We were talking about "readily available information" to prove conspiracies ( not conspiracy THEORIES ).

Well, the fact Jews dominate fucking CAPITAL is more easy to find out than who is in the Grand Lodge.

cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/vol44no5/html/v44i5a03p.htm

not exactly a conspiracy, retard

This is why right-wing /pol/-tards are instructed to get back to their containment board

>it's a beautiful message

And look what that beautiful message brought the world?

ok? I never disputed anything about Jews or whatever the fuck, why are you responding to me like it in any way addresses anything I've said?

apparently the iron cage of capitalism.

t. max weber

I don't really know what philosophies are generally discussed here, but very generally speaking, Evola-type stances seem that they would appeal to the most as far as the right wing goes. Maybe That's too extreme though. I consider my views quite fringe on the right.

Some great good, some great bad. We take what is good, we leave behind what is bad. That is the dialectic.

>Jews dominating finance and the media
The large overrepresentation is an empirical fact. But this does not imply it is -due to- any one particular cause, such as a ZOG conspiracy which does not have good supporting evidence.
Ashkenazi Jews have an average IQ between 107-115, which predicts about this level of overrepresentation in elite positions (assuming the strong correlation between IQ and success holds.) It's kind of like how the much larger standard deviation in male IQ scores compared to female satisfactorily explains male overrepresentation in science and government without the need of a patriarchy conspiracy theory.
How did Jews get it? IQ was likely correlated slightly with resistance to assimilation throughout medieval europe and to a larger degree with avoiding murder in the holocaust, but thats just a guess. Probably isn't magic Limitless-style ZOG pills in secret circulation by every ashkenazi jew which boosts IQ by ten points though.

It's also the case that Jews have historically been relegated to positions involving money-lending and finance due to the perceived immorality of the practice among respectable citizens, so it would make sense that there is a higher aggregate of jews in financial occupations these days

Meritocracy let the Jews in yes. That speaks for itself.
Before that Jews were barred from those sensitive areas.
It's no wonder they now take the opportunity to rise to such levels.

But to solely attribute their success to their innate qualities, I wouldn't go so far.
They would, obviously, hold a positive bias towards other Jews and allow them in the field.

I don't think this is such a difficult concept for you guys to grasp, since you believe in white privilege.

When the right wingers stop peppering in shit like "fucking dindus, womans are stupid." And shit like that, we can discuss the philosopher and author without the bullshit. But until then, a post that basically asks me to answer why they think some philosopher rationalizes thier hate, is gonna be shit.

>They would, obviously, hold a positive bias towards other Jews and allow them in the field.

I don't even know how this is a controversial idea, they actively admit to it especially in Hollywood

But somehow, Jews taking power is "whatever? so?"

But whites having power.. You might as well give it to Satan.

> but the threads of right wing ones always end up in conflicts whether or not they should go to "le /pol/ echo chamber"?

i mean ctrl+f "jew" in this thread and there's your answer right there.

You can ctrl+f Jew in a lot of big threads and get the same shit regardless

jews are white

Yet it's totally cool and justified to talk about and problematize the fact that the white majority is in charge of white countries.

They don't identify with the white majority.

It doesn't matter if we classify blacks as "humans like anyone else, why do u see colour :)?" when obviously they and everyone else considers them to be a different group of people.

I see this in a lot of pol tard threads, and its always that whiteness ends where your jew begins.

If they are complaining about black folks, everyone who is the color white is better.

If they are complaining about white folks, white doesn't matter anymore.

Cannibalistic unsustainable hate machine, that's what they've created, and it won't get any influence besides some guys who got cucked or jumped in the hood.

>This user thinks that the entirety of judaism is secrelty after the goal of CRIMINALIZING whiteness and hes undermining his own point

No I don't.
Where did I say any of that?

Nowadays talking about white privilege has become a legit debate.
Jew privilege would be considered antisemitic and "lel ZOG protocols rite u nutjob xD"

>white privilege has become a legit debate.

what book did you read that in?

Pay notice.

scholastic.nd.edu/issues/56116-white-privilege-course-prepares-for-conference/

People complain about the privilege of other people all the time!

Everyone in the world thinks someone else doesn't deserve what they have. It's life. White people won, they did the best, and it feels weird to have a rich white person complain about anything that isn't traumatic, because they have nothing to complain about.

Rich black folks don't have much to cry about either, and that disgusts me too.

I'm reality, its poor people, of any color or religion, who get the shittiest cards dealt to them, are still called loses if they don't win.

People say so lot of things man.

Stormfronters simultaneously say whites are infallible, and that someone is destroying them internally. Black people simultaneously hate the other black people in their lives for ruining the neighborhood but blame whites anyways.

When you think to compare some black college girl condescendingly explaining to a white guy that the house his grandpa built for him to live in is a privelege, to some 4fag blaming the "kikes" for his financial problems, think again. They are two different things.

>student magazine

why would you even waste your time.

>since you believe in white privilege
Jesus fucking Christ, how bout you read the post you replied to? It's these routine lapses in argumentation, awareness and reasoning that make people resent your sort.
>due to the perceived immorality of the practice among respectable citizens
Christians essentially forbade between themselves a voluntary transaction both demanded and supplied by the market. This is bad policy. You have christian pseudo-morality to thank for its effects. Also, though the arabs "historically" have been on the forefront of scientific progress and secularism, this has not born out commensurate achievements in the modern world and more recent factors are more relevant to jewish demography as well.

>using an exclamation mark

leftism is what happens when the intellectual elite have no problems to solve: their minds create make-work and you end up with dysfunctional bureaucracies which solve problems that didn't actually exist.

Ok, fuck you.
This is so typical for online and any debate nowadays.

I give you a fucking clear example. It's about a seminar that will take place at the University of Notre Dame on white privilege. It shows that a debate concerning this topic IS going on.

>lol student magazine

Again fuck you.

having a 1 credit seminar is like the equivalent of not having a class at all. also 1 tiny class, at a private university, in 1 city, 1 state, in 1 country isn't indicative of a "debate". and even if it was a debate what degree of influence would it have over the rest of the city, nation, or world?

it's shit evidence mate pure and simple. there's no big debate about white privilege going on, and if there is, it's no bigger than any other debate that happens on university campuses. and if its as important as those debates, then its not really important at all.

Only the false-flaggers do that.

Holy fucking shit.
Either you're living under a rock, or you're being a contrarian fucking dork.
Yes, that was one example. That was a very good observation of you, kid.
Now you want me to name ALL the seminars, classes and books written on white privilege to show that a debate is on-going?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiteness_studies

And why don't you do a google search and see for yourself all the references you need:
google.be/search?q=white privilege literature&oq=white privilege literature&aqs=chrome..69i57.3024j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

>there's no big debate about white privilege going on, and if there is, it's no bigger than any other debate that happens on university campuses
Not the guy you're replying to but you must be pretty sheltered if you think this isn't something beyond some small class shitfests. All this nonsense about "evil whites" and "whites have no culture" and all the other bullshit has been going on for a while now, not just American college campuses, and it's only been getting bigger. It's only just recently people have started to say enough is enough. It's basically highly concentrated toxic modern liberalism, the same kind that's letting in a hundreds of thousands, millions, of illegals into Europe.
Somewhat related:
youtube.com/watch?v=1Eqq55wAaQ0
youtube.com/watch?v=xfO1veFs6Ho

>and if there is, it's no bigger than any other debate that happens on university campuses

I like how you put clause in there.
Any proof there is a debate you can simply put aside as "it's like any other debate".

How quaint. How Veeky Forums.
You deserve to get your head smashed by a metal bar.

>Didn't read
>Saw an exclamation point
>Sperged about it so that we would think he read it.

Why bother giving attention to some total reddit numbnut? I mean she's being obvious, not just with the exclamation mark.

Liberals take out their feelings about extremist conservatives on us moderates and vice versa.

The majority here is liberal so you get suppression of ideology similar to what happens on pol.

look there's no big debate going on. having a million google results doesn't mean there's a big debate going on because I could google something as asinine as "the earth is flat"

google.be/search?q=white privilege literature&oq=white privilege literature&aqs=chrome..69i57.3024j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#q=the earth is flat literature

i get more results for this than white privilege literature. even the fucking wikipedia article is longer. does that mean there's a big debate about the earth being flat going on? no. well maybe between retards yes, but the earth is not flat. it's an insignificant issue from the extreme right that gets embellished by the left as a way to mock the right.

the same goes for white privellege. it's a fringe topic in the left that gets brought up by the right to mock the left.

there literally is no debate of any significance on white privilege. even by academic standards it is such a fringe topic devoting anything more than a half baked seminar, to undergrads of all people, is simply a waste of time.

Are you being paid to do this? I'll have to disappoint your employer by saying this, but you won't change anyone's minds on Veeky Forums, or Veeky Forums in general. It's a waste of time.

So what is a big debate than by your personal fucking standards, dork?

>but the earth is not flat.
according to?
seculars?