Can you explain to me how Marcuse who's part of the Frankfurt School is so revered by the SJWs even though he's against the SJW bullshit and generally pretty reasonable?
>This sort of tolerance strengthens the tyranny of the majority against which authentic liberals protested. The political locus of tolerance has changed: while it is more or less quietly and constitutionally withdrawn from the opposition, it is made compulsory behavior with respect to established policies. Tolerance is turned from an active into a passive state, from practice to non-practice: laissez-faire the constituted authorities. It is the people who tolerate the government, which in turn tolerates opposition within the framework determined by the constituted authorities.
>Tolerance toward that which is radically evil now appears as good because it serves the cohesion of the whole on the road to affluence or more affluence. The toleration of the systematic moronization of children and adults alike by publicity and propaganda, the release of destructiveness in aggressive driving, the recruitment for and training of special forces, the impotent and benevolent tolerance toward outright deception in merchandizing, waste, and planned obsolescence are not distortions and aberrations, they are the essence of a system which fosters tolerance as a means for perpetuating the struggle for existence and suppressing the alternatives.
> The group that makes hysteria a relevant pathological category again is ignorant
Well I'll be...
Samuel Davis
I've actually seen him mentioned as the philosophical founder of SJW bullshit or something like that by people who don't like them too, and I just can't wrap my mind around it. Am I completely misunderstanding this shit or what?
Luis Cox
If you're referring to Cultural Marxism conspiracy theorists, then you're pretty much searching for meaning in a barren wasteland filled with shit flinging monkeys. Forget about Youtube philosophers and just read the authors. The Frankfurt School pretty much considered identity politics insufficient compared to class struggle (however we may define it as) and opposed the degeneracy of cheap entertainment for the masses.
Leo Parker
The trouble with people who complain about the Frankfurt school being misrepresented, is that they never really offer anything by way of a remedy.
If we could have some Veeky Forums-style reading guide, I'd properly look into it.
Over the past few days, I've seen people claiming they were actually fairly conservative traditionalists, who were complaining about Capitalism subverting real/proper culture on account of globalism and general consumer culture.
If that's true, then they have a weird amount in common with the likes of Evola.
Jaxson Roberts
>If you're referring to Cultural Marxism conspiracy theorists, then you're pretty much searching for meaning in a barren wasteland filled with shit flinging monkeys
You can't blame them in fairness, after self-declared Marxists went in and scrapped the Wikipedia article for Cultural Marxism in favour of a redirect to the 'conspiracy theory' section of the Frankfurt School page.
When most people use the phrase, what they really mean is something more in line with Gramsci's Critical Theory.
Ayden Nelson
I wouldn't call them conservative traditionalists exactly since they were Marxists, they were not seeking to conserve the present system, but since they were intellectuals they pretty much had sources from the entire history of Western thought so in this way they were traditionalist. Hence the conspiracy accusations: if you read Benjamin you'll see that the Jewish texts were filled with philosophical problems worthy of consideration , such as the value of bare life or the relationship between law and protest.
>>Over the past few days, I've seen people claiming they were actually fairly conservative traditionalists, who were complaining about Capitalism subverting real/proper culture on account of globalism and general consumer culture. This is literally what Marcuse is saying in the shit I linked in the OP. Habermas was supposedly heavily against postmodernism. So who the hell is responsible for what is generally thought of as the "Frankfurt School bullshit" in popular discourse? Gramsci?
Mason Nguyen
>So who the hell is responsible for what is generally thought of as the "Frankfurt School bullshit" in popular discourse? Gramsci?
I'd say the Neo-Liberals who, during the latter half of the 20th century, tried to make Capitalism/Free Trade one in the same with Conservatism.
It makes sense that they'd want to smear a school of thought that argued, not without reason, that all Capitalism and the Free Market achieve (unless properly regulated with generous amounts of Protectionism/etc) is some sort of soulless consumer culture that revolves around materialism.
Pic related sums it up nicely.
Jose Myers
>The trouble with people who complain about the Frankfurt school being misrepresented, is that they never really offer anything by way of a remedy.
The only solution would be a counter-propaganda campaign. How the fuck do you expect us to fix stupid people obsessing over stupid shit?
>If we could have some Veeky Forums-style reading guide, I'd properly look into it.
All you would need is a google. The shit spouted by pol/, Crowder or whatever doesn't even make sense after you read the fucking Wikipedia entry
I have never heard a liberal or an SJW mention any of the Frankfurt schoolers. Ever.
When people trot out 'Cultural Marxism', what they really mean is the sort of selfish and self-serving moral/cultural relativism we have seen throughout the 20th century which, if taken to its logical terminus, leads to an essentially amoral/immoral society of toxic individualism.
Christopher Robinson
> When most people use the phrase, what they really mean is something more in line with Gramsci's Critical Theory.
I wouldn't know, I only heard it on Veeky Forums spouted as a conspiracy theory against Western civilization.
Caleb Hill
The cancer starts with Hegel and runs through all of what is called "continental philosophy". Once you open the door to irrational nonsense, anything goes.
Evan Wilson
Define rational.
Alexander Ortiz
>>When people trot out 'Cultural Marxism', what they really mean is the sort of selfish and self-serving moral/cultural relativism we have seen throughout the 20th century which, if taken to its logical terminus, leads to an essentially amoral/immoral society of toxic individualism. This is a pretty good description of the ideology blob I have in mind when someone says it, yeah. So what are the proper origins of that then?
Tyler Roberts
And none of that shit has anything to do with SJW's, so the conspiracy is still retarded
James Thompson
>>The cancer starts with Hegel and runs through all of what is called "continental philosophy". But how when there's also Kant and Kierkegaard and Nietzsche and Schoppenhauer, who are all relatively reasonable.
Anthony Diaz
>muh analytics Every fucking time.
Joseph Martinez
Kant was pre-Hegel, and the others you mention rejected Hegel.
Sebastian Fisher
Oh look, Veeky Forums is debating Marxism again. But as soon as a conservative author is presented it's "MEME MEME MEME!!!!!".
Joseph Hill
Take your "muh feels" and go straight back to plebbit, homo.
Isaiah Peterson
Reminder that sjws have now gone full circle and hate the jews for opressing those poor palestinians.
Jaxson Cook
That's the question, bub.
It's hard to tell who's responsible, but you can certainly tell who benefits:
1) Capitalists. These guys hate borders/nations and any sort of distinct culture, as these things provide an obstacle to the utopian ideal; that is, a one-market world of entirely interchangeable consumers and producers. As things are right now, with regulations/differing tastes/etc, the push for a global economy comes as no surprise.
2) Delusional 'revolutionary' Lefties who likewise dream of a world with "No Borders, No Nations", as they actually see these things as an invention of the Capitalists to 'divide and conquer' Humanity. The moral/cultural relativism they exercise is just one means by which they hope to achieve a 'unified' Humanity; by essentially relativizing all meaningful Human differences out of existence.
Both sides of the coin misunderstand one another, yet both benefit one another. Capitalists see Lefties as useful idiots, whereas Lefties see Capitalists as evil. They share the same enemy, and thus they are one another's friend; even if they don't really realize it.
Josiah Diaz
Foucault. He started all that crap. Honestly, Foucault was even supportive of neoliberalism.
Parker Allen
But jews are opressing the palestinians. Jews don't receive a special "get out of jail" card for doing all sorts of retarded shit, same with muslims or anyone else.
Connor Butler
Why aren't leftists just converting to Islam? They've completely hollowed out everything they stand for to appease to one particular religion and that religion only. At this point they're not even leftists anymore, but crypto-islam.
Robert Anderson
I see, this is interesting. Isn't Zizek autistically obsessed with Hegel? He strikes me as a rather unsavory type too.
Jaxson Nguyen
There's no "conspiracy" the way rightwingers imagine it - as in, a bunch of intellectuals plotting to take down Western civilization.
No, it started with Hegel's personal choice to write in a torturous style like Kant, but without any actual ideas underneath. He figured, "most people can't tell the difference between Kant and sheer nonsense, so why put in the effort?" And it worked for him - he became a celebrity. Thing is, Kant was a bad writer but a great thinker. Hegel was both a bad writer and a bad thinker, and became famous by "playing the part" of the philosopher in the public imagination. He set the example for future nonsense-mongers like Heidegger, Foucault, Derrida, and all the "SJW" types that refuse to make sense out of principle.
Michael Peterson
Is the relativism just a perfectly natural byproduct of academic nepotism/cronyism then?
Jose Butler
Zizek is really religious. He detests all "pagan" forms of ideology and exalt the Christian tradition to a point where he might as well be one. He claims he's an atheist and a materialist, but in essence he talks from within the bounds of a radical idealism. Like most of these neo-Lacanians, they're really a 21st century form of Jansenism.
Gavin Roberts
> He set the example for future nonsense-mongers like Heidegger, Foucault, Derrida, and all the "SJW" types that refuse to make sense out of principle.
People unironically think this. I'm not even gonna refute it. Just google some lectures on said authors and see if they make sense for you or not.
Mason Scott
Marcuse also worked for the CIA, was critical of the USSR, etc. Pretty based for a marxist.
Jaxson Brooks
HE ISNT THEY DONT READ THEM YOU FUCKING YOUTUBE CHANNEL FELLATING MOUTH BREATHING RETARD
Ryder Lee
Pagan values are the only salvation for the west.
I think I'm going pagan, because all else seems like cuckoldly and suicide at this point.
Jaxson Gray
If I like these guys and think everyone who doesn't is a degenerate, who else should I read?
Julian Allen
I'd say good old-fashioned greed and delusion are at its roots, but it goes deeper than that.
The main driving force is economic, however; Globalization, namely. Politically speaking, the Utopians are riding on Globalization's coat tails. They are only slightly better, as their motivation (delusion) is no where near as bad as greed, but both roads lead to the same dystopia.
That is, a world of bourgeois bohemians and hedonistic libertines; people who, as if having taken the thinking of Epicurus/etc to the very limits of autism, spare no thought for the morrow and live only for the pursuit of pleasure and of 'more'.
It ironically matches Schopenhauer's definition of Will; endless, blind striving. These things make people sacrifice themselves on behalf of their Will; or perhaps, to become sheer Will with lives of Willing.
Carter Hughes
They are. I used to be into Zizek, but the more I study him, the more I see this "let's be utopian for utopianism's sake" being absolutely detrimental to society. It's what makes continental philosophy shit.. This "let's chase my dreams/break some eggs/fail better" that is a sign of quarter life crisis kids. And I'm not an analytic at all, but jesus fucking christ..
Like how he completely stutters when we are actually facing staggering challenges.
>uh...uh... uh... my gott accept/do not accept all deh refugees, but we need to think first!!
It's absolutely ineffective. He has proven himself to be an armchair Hegelian. And he even says he's ready to abandon all "the leftist bullshit" for one good reading of Hegel, so there you have his goals. Good if you wanna get into Hegel, but that's it.
David Roberts
The term was originally a leftist one, and it pretty much coincided with its current 4chanistic meaning.
Emily Hicks was one of Marcuse's students, this is from '81:
>In her essay, “Cultural Marxism: Nonsynchrony and Feminist Practice,” Emily Hicks argues that the marriage of Marxism and feminism leads to a narrow formulation of their respective oppressions and a narrow understanding of the dynamics of society. Hicks states that a cultural Marxism is needed to reach and incorporate broader groups of people into a socialist movement: people who do not all have the same politics or the same political needs. Nor the same socialist vision. A Marxism that cannot reach more people with its theory and practice will become irrelevant.
And from Merelman a couple of years later:
>I wanted to [...] find a novel way of talking about culture and politics. To this end I was simultaneously stimulated and frustrated by recent work on my chosen subject. I found “cultural Marxism” as pursued by Raymond Williams, Gramsci, Habermas, Lukacs, and others immensely suggestive, yet ultimately unsatisfactory.
Cameron Cook
he only stutters in english, it's weird, even in french that disappears
Angel Lee
>but the more I study him, t Wait, people actually take him seriously as a philosopher/thinker/whatever?
I just watch him like I'd watch Sargon or whoever on youtube, as a guy who comments on some random social phenomenon. Do you people actually read his books or something?
Connor Cooper
>He started all that crap.Honestly, Foucault was even supportive of neoliberalism.
See? Veeky Forums has no idea what the fuxk they are talking about
Carter Kelly
>Emily Hicks argues that the marriage of Marxism and feminism MARXISM+
Easton Taylor
he's a serious philosopher, he writes both pop and serious books wouldn't you do the same, given the chance? have some impact rather than only speak to 1000 people max.
Carter Ramirez
>Tfw he has an entire shelf devoted to him in the philosophy section of my Waterstones
Tyler Richardson
I heard his books are just endless repetitions of the same shit he talks about (and he already repeats the same shit in all of his talks) so I never bothered. What are the "serious" books on?
Evan Adams
So-called "cultural marxism" is the opposite of everything Marx ever believed in and stood for.
Aaron Fisher
His book on Hegel was the first, since a long time, where he didn't make "dirty jokes" or some childish pop nonsense bullshit references.
It's really good.. And it's the only book he is actually proud of.
Angel Sanchez
A bullshit artist "interpreting" another bullshit artist - fantastic.
Evola isn't a traditionalist. He's a new age ooga booga moron. >heh the tradition isn't what has been done for the past 1500 years, the REAL tradition is this Indian magic bro, that's what Europe is really about
Alexander Scott
YEAH BUT WHAT IF WE DONT DREAM WE END UP IN ASIATIC DESPOTISM
Jacob Sanders
...
Jose Campbell
I question to what extent the Left should be putting so much faith in religious Muslims as our allies. They're either turning to right-wing religious fascism, or assimilating quite nicely into capitalism and consumerism. Very rarely do you see Muslim immigrants joining Leftist parties.
Easton Carter
No real leftist is opposed to capitalism as such, capitalism is progressive under certain contexts and attempting to introduce alternatives where there just doesn't exist the basis only ends badly. Only America, China and developed industrial powers have the means to seriously transition away from capitalism today if they wanted to.
Communitarianism, even self proclaimed leftist ones, should always be viewed skeptically. Passports didn't even exist before WWI, a world without borders isn't utopian you just have to undo the massive growth of the state that occurred in the 20th century.
Robert Cook
He's old and ethnic. He's popular because there's still this faction among undergrads who don't want to engage in identity politics, not because it's retarded tribalism necessarily, but mainly because they suffer from sehnsucht for the 19th century.
Zachary Reyes
>not utopian ease of transport unlimited information
Grayson Watson
Evola was a Traditionalist; he just defined Tradition as a handful of eternal, unchanging values. I don't have them to hand at the moment.
Tradition, in the sense that most 'conservatives' think of it, was in his eyes nothing more than 'residues.' That is, attachment to certain institutions/styles/etc throughout history, which are not 'Traditional' at all but merely 'bourgeois residues'.
The point of 'Men Among the Ruins' was for people to abandon the ruins; those dilapidated, crumbling institutions and all of the 'dust' from whatever bygone and irretrievable era they may wish to resurrect.
This type of man, once free from the ruins, can then proceed to build new and lasting institutions/traditions/etc, themselves founded on the eternal and unchanging values of 'Tradition' - rather than longing for mere ruins, which would probably collapse on top of him regardless.
Jackson Young
Let me guess - you watch a lot of Fox News, right?
Elijah Wood
>falling for /pol/ memes kek
Anyway, One Dimensional Man is great and so are Minima Moralia and Dialectic of Enlightenment.
Austin Sanchez
>No real leftist is opposed to capitalism as such Are you fucking retarded?
Jacob Thompson
>No real leftist is opposed to capitalism as such
I'm not really convinced. At best, you might find a few who think of it as a necessary evil; to be tolerated until such times as it can be cast off completely.
>Passports didn't even exist before WWI, a world without borders isn't utopian you just have to undo the massive growth of the state that occurred in the 20th century. >No passports meant no borders, no border control, etc
Levi Green
FAUX NEWS xDDDD
Yeah and I vote Trump and make an issue out of trannies pissing in the bathroom. I'm a walking strawman basically.
Luke Carter
>No real leftist is opposed to capitalism as such lmao
Colton Jones
Sounds like NWO talk to me famafufu.
Juan Garcia
Zizek is of relevance nowadays, because like de Benoist of the European New Right, both think the Left-Right dictotomy of today is bullshit in an age of unopposed liberalism. The so-called postmodern left nowadays accepts the rootless nature of cosmopolitanism and its materialis.
Notice how they're all obcessed with consuming and commenting on pop culture.
Charles Parker
I mean what's the point of 'tradition' if I cannot stick it to the niggers. I don't care about eternity or values. I just don't wanna see blacks do any better than any one member of my race is all (or for them to be able to fuck our women).
Gavin Gonzalez
Without capitalism you just got feudalism forever. Marx was even a free trader and attacked reactionary economists like Friedrich List.
People largely could go pretty much where ever they wanted if they had the means to. Marco Polo travelled the world without communist or capitalist border guards detaining him even once!
Jonathan Turner
>Thinks gay rights and feminism are radically evil
Get some perspective you fucking idiot
Colton Ramirez
>Friedrich List my nigga. now there is a name all this 'nationalists' should learn.
Christian Martin
It sounded like that to me too, senpai.
He makes a persuasive case, however; and one that actually stands up to scrutiny more than defending 'X traditions from X country at X time'.
You'd have some fun with Evola, lel.
He blamed Jazz on niggers and essentially claimed that it, along with the sort of 'wild' dancing that followed, were evil and corrupting.
>People largely could go pretty much where ever they wanted if they had the means to.
Yeah, as fucking tourists.
>Implying they weren't
Open your eyes, friendo.
Liam Bennett
Why aren't they? Calling it the current year is not an argument, you navel gazing millennial shithead.
Thomas Hall
>He said tolerance, that means political correctness You dumb fuck.
Tyler Ward
>Yeah, as fucking tourists. What do you mean by this? I remember in times of Dostoyevski, who both did this, and wrote about various characters doing it, it was customary to move to Europe from Russia with no hassles (if you had means to support yourself), especially if you got into some sort of political or legal trouble etc.
Bentley Taylor
>Without capitalism you just got feudalism forever. Marx was even a free trader and attacked reactionary economists like Friedrich List. 0/10 - retarded troll.
Colton Hall
As much as I envy the people of those days their freedom to move about between nations, if they possessed the means, nowadays we cannot do that.
Look at the swaths of sandniggers that storm into Europe. There's too many people and the modes of communication and transportation are too fast for us to allow this sort of freedom. Especially with vastly unequal parts of the world.
Ethan Bailey
This just sounds like the bar has been raised from "being able to support yourself" to "being ridiculously rich" to me.
Jace Lopez
Neo-liberalism. The right serves economical liberalism while the left serves cultural liberalism. They're the two sides of the same coin,
Daniel Collins
>I'd watch Sargon
Kevin Williams
What's wrong with that? He's funny.
Ryder Jenkins
Sadly enough, we need rich people more than we require low-skilled sandniggers who are now getting state funded education on how not to consider scantily clad women during the summer months as women who as potential rape victims.
My dad's a chief of police in a small European city organizing this type of bullshit for the enriching hordes.
But sure, open up those oppressive borders because "we're all human".
Inb4 "deh cops r raycis"
Levi Diaz
>Look at the swaths of sandniggers that storm into Europe. >There's too many people and the modes of communication and transportation are too fast for us to allow this sort of freedom. Especially with vastly unequal parts of the world.
This is literally the result of "modernism" and unequal development. You created the problem and its not going away. Europe needs the resources of those countries and cheap labour so they had to make living conditions shit making people want to flee from the shit modernism created. There was no mass migration for thousands of years not because people couldn't cross into Europe on rafts but because life was comfortable and people had liveable communities they didn't want to leave. Some form of coordinated international development bank like Keynes proposed after WWII to develop the 3rd world is necessary but fat fucks in Europe and America will never give interest free loans to the third world so the situation will just get worse instead of better.
Brody Carter
>One Dimensional Man is great
Dylan Powell
We should just glass the Middle East, frankly.
Yes, all of it; and purge its emigrants from our societies.
Christian Sullivan
hi fellow redpilled gentlemen itt :) what infographics shaped your worldview the most?
Austin Davis
I fully agree with all of that. But we cannot go back. Unless a disaster awaits us and the human species is thinned out and goes back to using candles and horses.
Capitalism will not fall because of a chimpout. That people past young adulthood still believe this is beyond me.
Robert Baker
Isn't there some Nick Land thread where you need to go shout "meme meme meme!" because he's not a Marxist, but kind of a Deleuzian, so you don't wanna be too harsh on him?
Connor Bell
>Unless a disaster awaits us Well it's not like global warming is going to be taken care of.
Gabriel Murphy
Of course, the middle east was paradisaical before evil western capitalist fatcats ruined it.
Christian Jenkins
To understand how Capitalism ends, read Schumpeter not Marx. From Wikipedia:
Schumpeter's most popular book in English is probably Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. While he agrees with Karl Marx that capitalism will collapse and be replaced by socialism, Schumpeter predicts a different way this will come about. While Marx predicted that capitalism would be overthrown by a violent proletarian revolution, which actually occurred in the least capitalist countries, Schumpeter believed that capitalism would gradually weaken by itself and eventually collapse. Specifically, the success of capitalism would lead to corporatism and to values hostile to capitalism, especially among intellectuals. "Intellectuals" are a social class in a position to critique societal matters for which they are not directly responsible and to stand up for the interests of other classes. Intellectuals tend to have a negative outlook of capitalism, even while relying on it for prestige, because their professions rely on antagonism toward it. The growing number of people with higher education is a great advantage of capitalism, according to Schumpeter. Yet, unemployment and a lack of fulfilling work will cause intellectual critique, discontent and protests. Parliaments will increasingly elect social democratic parties, and democratic majorities will vote for restrictions on entrepreneurship. Increasing workers' self-management, industrial democracy and regulatory institutions would evolve non-politically into "liberal capitalism". Thus, the intellectual and social climate needed for thriving entrepreneurship will be replaced by some form of "laborism". This will restrict "creative destruction" (a borrowed phrase to denote an endogenous replacement of old ways of doing things by new ways) and so will burden and destroy the capitalist structure.
Joseph Murphy
I feel like it won't be as destructive. The sea should be at my doorstep by now if I had to believe all those alarmists.
Henry Smith
>I feel Well then.
Joseph Watson
Link to an actual scientist who predicted the sea would be "at your doorstep by now"?
Anthony Carter
You don't need rich people. Literally everything you want/desire is the creations of semi-slaves in third world countries. The rich don't give you anything, all you want comes from semi-slaves. The more you want the more slaves you need. The more you buy the more labour you need. Europe is just now starting to realize they created a shit world filled with billions of slaves they can't control anymore.
Then you will have to turn Europe and America into gigantic slave societies like communist China today if you don't want to completely change the economic system. Instead of paying out dividends or debt payments you could wipe all debt and payment obligations off the books, implement basic income, raise minimum wage to $20 an hour, and direct all funds towards investing in technology that exists today to fully automate the production process.
Joseph Barnes
Calm down karl ove
Kayden Richardson
>you could wipe all debt and payment obligations off the books, implement basic income, raise minimum wage to $20 an hour, and direct all funds towards investing in technology that exists today to fully automate the production process.
You fucking retard.
Go back to /r/feelthebern.
Pic very related.
Cooper Gutierrez
>slave societies like communist China
Holy shit, you have no clue. I'd rather be living in Shanghai now than I would in any coastalfag state.
Samuel Sanders
You have to be 18 to post here, come back in 5 years.
Wyatt Ward
>Then you will have to turn Europe and America into gigantic slave societies like communist China today if you don't want to completely change the economic system. I thought that was the general plan already?
