In order to prevent this, what books should be required reading?

>is it alt-right stuff?
not necessarily, just things like, "Normie" hate, "chad" hate, wageslave hate, women hate, general fedora stuff. As soon as /pol/ left Veeky Forums, /r9k/ flooded in.

/pol/ was at least a bit of fun.

Mine wasn't an /r9k/ post, women are more collective. That's part of their charm, think of mummy, user.

Heidegger. and not the cop out babby Heidegger filtered through Sartre and Beauvoir

I used this photo as an example and it happened to have a woman. I just want to know what books contain the knowledge that could have prevented a generation with an intellectually shallow buzzword culture.

Marx wasn't an SJW, but his thought did lead to that place, maybe not strictly logically, but over the course of history.

Literally the western canon. Just keep reading books by dead white males or dead white females, it is the best stuff and everybody know it.

I'm not even racist and would be considered an SJW by /pol/, but I stand by the dead white male canon.

Internet misogyny.

Nothing, education is poisoned, the Soviets won.

but most of it is gay as shit and filled with literal cuckolding
seriously have you read any greek shit or renaissance faggotry?

>complaining about buzzwords
>calls the Greeks gay and cucks

You've never read Black Oxen by Gertrude Atherton, have you

Yeah, but it's old fashioned gay cuckolding. Sometimes, people get called niggers too.

There are always exceptions and no, I must admit to being ignorant of that book. Thank you for informing me of it, I will make sure to read it.

>queer

Marx would absolutely destroy people like her. She is spooked so fucking hard by pure ideology. Any identity which is not class identity is a pure spook.

class identity is a spook too but the plebs just aren't ready to swallow that pill.

No

does anyone else view this trend as women collectively asserting sexual power? like, they deliberately make themselves less attractive just to show they can get away with it?

if you go on any make up related vlog/website/video and post a comment saying something along the lines of "guys prefer girls with less makeup/guys don't like that sort of make up/guys like that sort of make up" the (overwhelming, it's one of those things they can't seem to let slip) response is always "i don't wear make up for anyone but myself". this is true on some levels but you can't deny that (desired) male attention is an enjoyed outcome (this can be direct or indirect i.e. the idea that women wear make up to impress other women still works here because male complements are an indirect way of achieving this)

you also can't deny that when a clumsy but ultimately harmless comment can invite such an aggressive response, something pathological is going on

but what if you make yourself more unattractive (make up is just an example)

i know men can find people like this attractive but collectively what they find attractive has to changed i.e. on average this woman isn't what men find attractive so if the average woman starts to resemble like this then the average male attraction has to adapt

this constant "downgrading" yet desire to be accepted for "who you are" can be viewed as a sort of narcissistic insecurity when practiced by individuals but when it's done collectively (they all look, sound, act and think in similar ways) then how else are you supposed to read it?

can you also think of things like promiscuity/the desire to have open relationships etc this way too? i also wonder if this trend is the same for men, like in the manchild phenomenon (less willing to take responsibilty, less interesting, less practical etc)

>It's a "People think Marxism=Social Liberalism/SJW and won't fucking admit that's not true no matter how much evidence you give them because they're that cucked by retarded /pol/ ideology" thread

Incredible rebuttal dude

I'm right wing but /pol/ is so fucking retarded and infuriating I'm debating switching to left wing just to spite the NEETs

>muh trickle down economics
Please stop this meme.

Why do you consider yourself Right Wing anyway? If you feel you could easily go left out of spite you probably weren't very Right in the first place m8

Contrarianism is very enjoyable, I thoroughly recommend it.

YOU FUCKING PINKO SUNNUVABITCH!

>History is a meme because it's inconvenient to my world view

>Trickle Down Economics doesn't work guys
>But if you give the government 90% of your income then 110% of it will trickle back down in services

Unless you're a billionaire I've never heard a politician recommend taxing "your income" by 90%.

That's not a marxist attitude anyway

The point he's making is that people think the government is some magical, super-efficient, entity, and all you need to do is funnel your money into it and somehow economic woes will disappear.

Please no. Contrarianism is cancer.

not him, but when you post retarded shit like that all you deserve is a 'no'. marx only cares about class, and exactly none of these bitches are going to be working in a mine in angola for no pay any time soon.
have a pop song if that was too hard to wrap your mind around:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuTMWgOduFM

totally false dilemma
the income tax was engineered by neoclassical economists just to let you know, taxing income instead of unearned incomes was their idea to respond to the georgist single tax movement that was pretty big at the time

Somewhere along the line when I graduated high school in 2014 I got frustrated with the leftist front due to hypocrisies concerning and even people of my own side assuming I was right winged because I was white (in a school with about 50% minorities, 20 Indian, 20 Paki and Afghani, 10 black) and I despite being a registered Democrat I would pretend to be a Republican to make my dad happy, and my girlfriends parents happy

More of a social mandate basically

I identify as "right" despite having very progressive views because it was convenient to do so, and over time forgot and blindly followed the party line

Thanks for the therapy session user

Trickle down is a boogeyman political term.

I agree that making top earners pay more than middle or lower class people in order to have more social programs alone isn't a viable economic idea.

However it wouldn't be so bad if you had a government which was interested in making sure to put its constituents first. The problem with this of course is that most current Nation-States, particularly the USA, do the opposite of this because of allegiances with the corporate world (whether or not you're pro-capitalism this is pretty much an empirical fact at this point).

That's one of the purposes of movements, organizations, political parties etc that are further left than simple Social Democracy or Liberalism, to get out of that system which, no matter how hard you try to reform and regulate, will always find a new way to centralize and concentrate power in the hands of the few in both government and the private sector.

To be fair there's Right-Wing forms of doing this which slide all the way from moderate Conservative free-market fundamentalists (like the Libertarian Party, although not always with so much "lmao so random") to some of the more out there theories on the Alt-Right (which I disagree with but I'm just saying it's not a Left-specific thing to be against the military-industrial complex and the corrupt socioeconomic system that develops it).

Tl;DR My original point didn't even have anything to do with this anyway, it was just that Marxism is vastly different from the tumblrina agenda it usually gets conflated with, so you can take that or leave it. I'm just sick of people letting /pol/ dictate conversations on Veeky Forums because they've managed to shitpost their opinions so much they became true

I did kind of the same thing, used to be hardcore leftist, got angry at stupid hippies and shifted right, realised that the right wing was just as stupid and now I just hate ideology in general. I would probably be called a moderate because I'm neither left nor right, but some of my positions are quite radical

Oh okay

Trickle down was originally used as a dirty way of saying supply side but the right started actually using it to self describe supply side unironically in the early 80s... same thing happened with the term teabagger, it was an obvious insult but some people started selflabeling themselves teabaggers

youtube.com/watch?v=zXSco6U4Slk

There desperately needs to be a radical transcendence of the left/right divide.
>inb4 fascism
That was the collection of the worst elements of several ideologies.

> economic growth can be most effectively created by investing in capital and by lowering barriers on the production of goods and services.

While it's true the effects are horrible and anyone with a brain can see who's getting the real benefit here

>There desperately needs to be a radical transcendence of the left/right divide.

Why? Left Wing and Right Wing don't both just mean one thing and even people who identify as Leftist or Rightist usually understand that it's an arbitrary generalization used for convenience. Horseshoe theory is bullshit

>i'd probably be called a moderate
>some of my positions are quite radical

U wot m8?

That wasn't my point. My point was that the left took Marx's ideas and applied them to identity.

That's not how supply side works bro. Giving more money to rich people doesn't increase real investments, what ends up happening in practice is it just results in an inflation of real estate, stocks and financial securities relative to wage levels. Supply side theories were put into practice in the 80s and America was deindustrialized as a result.

ismaelhossein-zadeh.com/2016/07/08/marx-on-financial-bubbles/
>According to these economists, both neoliberal and Keynesian, any discrepancy or imbalance between finance capital, which they call it aggregate national savings (S), and real capital, which they call it aggregate national investment (I), would be temporary and, therefore, non-problematic because, they argue, the imbalance between S and I would soon be rectified either automatically by the forces of supply and demand (neoliberals), or by government intervention (Keynesians).

>In the neoliberal view, the balance between S and I is guaranteed by market mechanism: an excess of S over I would be only short-lived as this (temporary) oversupply of loanable funds would soon lead to lower rates of interest, which would then encourage businesses/manufacturers to borrow and invest more. This process of borrowing and investing the cheapened S would continue until the excess S is used up and equality between S and I is restored.

>In the Keynesian view, however, such a spontaneous or automatic restoration of balance between S and I is not guaranteed, which means that a situation of S>I, or insufficient investment spending, may persist for a long time. Under conditions of relative uncertainty and weak demand, even low interest rates would not induce manufacturers to borrow and invest, or expand. Under such conditions, the government can step in, borrow the “idle” savings and spend them (“in behalf of their wealthy owners,” as Keynes put it), thereby closing the savings–investment (or income–expenditures) gap.

>In the Marxian view, by contrast, the discrepancy or the gap between speculative “surplus capital” and productive investment can persist, or even widen, with calamitous consequences in terms of financial bubbles and market instability. Pointing out how in the age of big banks finance capital can grow independent of industrial capital, Marx writes: “The subsequent credit swindle proves that no real obstacle stands in the way of the employment of this surplus-capital,” a scenario that could precipitate asset-price inflation, or financial bubbles [9].

That's really hard to do, because the terms of left and right are so vague and malleable, that any spectrum of thought can be squeezed into the left/right dichotomy in some manner.

that point does not mean that marx or engel's work contains that, or intended that.

it would need to be some intersectional queermo book you were dissing, not marx and engel's, for that point to have any relevance at all, and it wasn't. which means you've bought and drunk the intersectional queermos koolaid that marx contained that at all, and makes you just as bad as them and just as ignorant of marx.

>the Left
the entire Left=milquetoast college Liberals?

>took Marx's ideas and applied them to identity
Where are any of Marx's ideas in modern identity politics movements? If you even bring up how race/gender/homosexual struggles are related to class struggle or class warfare you get called a "brocialist" or "class essentialist" or some stupid shit like that and shunned. That's one of the reasons anons earlier ITT talked about going Right wing out of spite and one of the biggest problems with American

Sometimes I wonder if the posters on /pol/ aren't just some well-renowned celebrities blowing off a lot of misplaced steam

Pretty much any books will help you not to be like her, I guarantee you this woman reads only CNN and Tumblr. But Plato can help. He's even sort of a feminist in the Republic, so you can bring that up when an SJW goes >muh dead white men.

To be honest, though, "stoner witch" sounds kind of cool.

You would be six feet underground wit 78 devils gnawing your bollocks before you finished reading and digesting even the pagan Greek and Latin classics, let alone the church fathers, let alone everything that has happened in the 1500 years since then.

>that point does not mean that marx or engel's work contains that, or intended that.

Obviously

>it would need to be some intersectional queermo book you were dissing, not marx and engel's, for that point to have any relevance at all, and it wasn't. which means you've bought and drunk the intersectional queermos koolaid that marx contained that at all, and makes you just as bad as them and just as ignorant of marx.

No

>the entire Left=milquetoast college Liberals?

No

>Where are any of Marx's ideas in modern identity politics movements? If you even bring up how race/gender/homosexual struggles are related to class struggle or class warfare you get called a "brocialist" or "class essentialist" or some stupid shit like that and shunned. That's one of the reasons anons earlier ITT talked about going Right wing out of spite and one of the biggest problems with American

No, I'm saying that instead of class struggle we have racial struggle, gender struggle, sexualtity stuggle etc. This is Marx's framework applied to other ideas.

And you can't deny Marx's incalculable effects on the left overall.

>No
Yes. You're retarded enough to think Marx=SJWs, you bought the SJW koolaid, and read exactly as much Marx as them, which is none.

Backing up with the classics, or classically influenced. Meditations, Memoirs of Hadrian etc.
also this is the only Stoner Witch worth mentioning

That is not what I have said. I only said that Marx's thought lead historically to them, not logically.

That's about as good as Marx's thought historically lead to neo-conservativism or bronies. Your brain is broken to the point I suspect you think Lucas' re-edits of his movies are not really Lucas movies.

When are you too old to be single? Have some weddings coming up this fall and I'm dreading going alone

Because Marcuse wasn't influenced by Marx at all.

Uhuh.

Being single is superior.

t. single man

>this thread

yeah basically. talk about class struggle and they say "shut up white man"

Nothing wrong with this bitch. She seems entertaining and interesting, even if superficially. We need more diversity in this grey boring world; even things that excite our disgust are welcomed, for normies aren't even superficially interesting.

If you haven't realized that inefficiency is actually good for the economy, you're not smart econoplebs.

And neo-cons never talk about Marxism. You're retarded, and wish that had been the SCUM Manifesto or some shit, because that would fit into your world view neater than Marx, because you don't want to read Marx just as much as an SJW doesn't want to read Marx but pretend they know what it's about.
It's kind of sad like people who like to pretend they're on the fifth level of a video game and make shit up about it anyone who's got to the fifth level knows is just a fantasy they made up to excuse never getting there. Only you share your fantasy with SJWs so it's actually slightly sadder than pretending you know what the fifth level of CoD is.

...

Why doyou come to a literature boad if you can't even fucking skim a wikipedia article?

The whole of this SJW disgrace can be traced back to humanist notions of the "soul" or whatever avatar it uses as a uncorruptible, unaccessible blah blah blah

b-but diversity destroys m-muh Western Civilization

Just watch this ebin anime and you'll be proven wrong u c-cuck:

youtube.com/watch?v=7lwypeJzAkE

Also if you are objective, it is a known fact that this retards have brought (through sophistry and lying) the political discourse to the left, for even reasonable leftists have to say "i am not racist (classist, homophobic, ad infinitum...), but I propose X, or i think Y.
The dialectical synthesis between regressives and liberals has exorcized the conservatism in liberals yet has ignored or neutralized the authoritarianism of regressives, ultimately improving this disgusting society were normality is the greatest currency

you seem to have a very high opinion of yourself. typical for a woman ;)

You seem incapable of constructing an actual rebuttal.

This isn't even a debate about my interpretation of Marx, it's a debate about the historical influence of Marx.

I know you orthodox Marxist fellows really don't want to be associated with SJWs. I'm not saying that Marx was in any way an SJW or or that Marxism is equivalent to SJWism. I'm just saying that Marx influenced this group. And I'm not just talking about some pseudo-intellectuals on tumblr. This is one of the most dominant ideologies in academia.

That doesn't mean that some notions of Marx aren't caught up in that disgrace.

>he thinks the historical influence of Marx is contained in Marx's work
I don't really need a rebuttal for someone who believes in psychics. It's a pity Engels edited out his listing of all the future lotto numbers.

>the person depicted in the OP seems interesting to this anonymous poster

But user, EW went to shit as soon as she joined.

>he thinks the historical influence of Marx is contained in Marx's work

Nice strawman, user.

Did you know that people can be influenced by some person's ideas and not completely convert to that person's teachings by means of changing the ideas and incorporating them within a different set of ideas?

And you think that happened to that edition of Marx and Engels' complete works? Protip: it didn't. You're still as dumb as an SJW who thinks their bullshit is in Marx because you too think that it will be in Marx's work.

I never said it was in Marx.

You don't seem to understand how ideas can be transformed, so allow me to illustrate.

Let's say you come up with the idea that people in blue hats are continually shit on by birds. And I'm like, "Really makes you think, huh." And so I take this idea and modify by thinking, "What if people in red hats are continually shit on by birds too?"

I didn't come up with my idea by myself - it was inspired by you. But my idea was not contained in your idea.

You don't seem to understand fan fiction isn't the work in question. user proposed they read Marx, not Marxist fanfiction. I would suggest you do the same because otherwise you're going to keep sounding this dumb and wondering why Veeky Forums tells you 'no'.

Do you really think Marcuse never read Marx?

You really think user was telling them to read Marcuse when he said read Marx and Engels? Are you dyslexic as well as dumb? Do you think start with the Greeks means start with Wilde who read the Greeks?

Marcuse is one of the men I have in question.

Of course there are many SJW types who have not read a word of Marx, but this is all besides the point.

I'm talking about Marx's influence, no matter how petty. I mean as petty as Descartes's influence on people from a fucking School of Life video.

It's his lack of influence you're talking about: the kind of lack of influence that comes from never reading him to find out he disagrees with all that bullshit.
Marcuse isn't what user said and for someone dumb enough to rely on calling strawman in an internet debate, you should surely see how dumbass a move that is. You are, again, as dumb as an SJW who thinks their fanfiction=Marx, when it doesn't at all. Your fanfiction of what Marx's work is gets called just as dumb as theirs because it's the same thing they think Marx contains. Hell, you think Marcuse is the same book as user posted of Marx. Do you really not expect to be treated like a retard for that? How deep in the SJW koolaid are you?

Uh why it's obviously a prime opportunity to hook up with the bride's jealous single friends

I don't know how many times I have to state this, but I didn't say that Marx's work agrees with the SJWs, only that his work happened to inspire them.

Hume inspired Kant, but of course Kant differs from Hume.

His work doesn't inspire them at all. Just because they think it does, like retarded folk like you do, doesn't mean they're right: it means they're retarded. You can think Catcher in the Rye is telling you to shoot the president but it just means you're psychotic, not that Salinger is inspiring you. Enjoy having the same reasoning and thoughts as an SJW; you're never getting a job cataloging though.

So if I look at a stop sign and decide to accelerate based on what it says, I am not influenced by the stop sign?

Please do.

I have been defeated, truly.

the ego and it's own. The origins of the family.

>women can be interesting
AHHHHHHHHHAHAHAHAHHAAAHAHAHAAAAAA