Is he right here?

What's the verdict on John Gray lads

Do you really get more of the Brave New World vibe from Trump more than the left?

Anyone who thinks ideologies and politics can be reduced to biology better have a metric fuck ton of evidence to actually back their theory up

Humans are all one species so it is pretty much impossible that different people somehow have different evolutionary started that develop into political ideas.

The whole point of that book was to show how the difference between a utopia and a dystopia can be convoluted and depends on the view of the individual

BNW is about complacency and conformity. In a world of chaos, it's easier to go "oh well" and delve into entertainment/addiction etc. It touches on either side of the spectrum

>let's do 60+ years of policys that will sure bring back nationalism and other kind of populists while we ignore all the problems!
>and then read some fictional novels when we try to understand why people are angry!

Maybe just dial down on all this immigration & multiculturalism a little and the other side will
not be so angry. It takes two to tango.

It's really boring to watch people using words with a very strict meaning as a simple insult in todays political commentary.

I doubt that people who use 'fascist' really knows what it really is, as a historical happening.

Call the guy stupid, a clown, autoritarian, dictator wannabe, whatever the hell you wanna use to insult him, but 'fascist' today means absolutely nothing outside its historical context.

>Do you really get more of the Brave New World vibe from Trump more than the left?
I did not claim such a thing. Brave New World sounds more like a emergent property from society than a left or right ideology.

You could read the books and judge for yourself. I think you take it way too far. They just claim that there are evolutionary origins for left and right (ingroup assimilation vs ingroup exclusion) but not that, say, anarchism, communism, social democracy, libertarianism, liberalism and so on and so forth have any evolutionary origins.

Many who look at sociology and psychology from a biological perspective think that nurture and nature both matter and instead of being hardwired they state we are firmwired.

One example is the taxi driver phenomenon. It boils down to brain plasticity.

I think you have all the right reasons to be skeptical of evolutionary psychology, some of it is bad.

But complicated answers for social phenomena should receive the same skepticism. People like Zizek will never convince me, and they do not even use evidence to back their theories up.

>populist upheavals
Not even worth it to read this nonsense. The reason the dystopian novels make more sense today than ever is because of the rabid left and how much they insist they are on the "right" side of history and because of that they think they can do whatever they want.

No! Multiculturalism is the savior of Europe!

The poster I was responding to wasn't talking about Gray.

I didn't know this would trigger people this much, actually pleasantly suprising to see.
Protip: skim the article better or actually read it instead of only reading the title and barely the text.

Nah the state of nature is more sophisticated because there's an actual anthropological base to work with and debate over.
You can literally create a Dystopia based around criticizing fucking anything.

Neither really

I think its actually fairly difficult to view the right and the left of American politics in terms of end goals
Its more just a matter of methodology and you don't see the results until everything gets wrung through the system at which point it becomes hard to say if there is any meaningful distinction
Its this way by design
I think its not too far fetched to say that political parties are nothing more than the placebo effect in action

I can agree with that.

Is anyone else enjoying the spectacle of leftists squirming like a slug in salt? I don't even like Trump that much but I can't argue with the sheer entertainment value of the Trump presidency.

I think what really makes it interesting is that the various liberal or leftists groups thought they had the presidency in the bag, so you can compare the smug, self righteous, pre-november rhetoric with the frantic and terrified screeching noises they're making now.

Thinking Trump is a fascist is incorrect.

I am a Marxist and I feel the same way as you

yeah american politics suck

no matter what some faggot wants to take your freedoms away, whether trying to take your guns or muh terrorists gotta see everything you do online goyim :^)

t. american

>being unironically a Marxist.

Y tho

See John Gray never claims that, he actually speaks against those people who do

I'm not, I'm post-ironically a Marxist

OP here, I did. Not anymore because I think climate change is a serious problem and Trump doesn't think so.
He better keeps his promise on foreign policies.

>post headline
>no one reads article rather just debates what they think about headline

This
>not ironically developing an idea so much as a joke that you start accepting it

Relating [very bad thing] with [thing I don't like] is the trademark of stupid people everywhere, I'm sick of liberals' childish rhetoric, these people need to be sterilized.

Aristotles politics described trump better than orwell

> think climate change is a serious problem and Trump doesn't think so.

Its not as if Hillary would have done much better there

>I think there is a lot of critique to be made of the man
like this retarded article and it's idiot author who can't understand the basic concepts of what he's trying to criticizing.

Yeah, this is absolutely true. Hillary's half-measures would have done fuck-all. The Arctic's already melting.

What we need is geoengineering and nuclear power, in that order.

>muh Trump is 1984

Is there any more pseud a belief than comparing your life to a dystopian meme? I would expect this from a high school freshman.

Jesus, who gives a fuck.

You evolutionary psychology simpletons don't belong on a literature board, your scientistic metaphors have no chance.

>The world is fascist now because these people I don't like won democratic elections

>another /pol/ thread

Fascism, as defined by Mussolini, the creator of fascism and the first fascist state, was corporate syndicalism or national syndicalism. He wrote a whole one page paper explaining exactly what fascism is: sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/mussolini-fascism.asp

Some definitions from (((wikipedia))):

Corporatism, also known as corporativism,[1] is the sociopolitical organization of a society by major interest groups, known as corporate groups, such as agricultural, business, ethnic, labour, military, patronage, or scientific affiliations, on the basis of their common interests.[2] It is theoretically based on the interpretation of a community as an organic body.[3] The term corporatism is based on the Latin root word "corpus" (plural – "corpora") meaning "body".[4]

Syndicalism is a proposed type of economic system, considered a replacement for capitalism. It suggests that workers, industries, and organisations be systematized into confederations or syndicates. It is "a system of economic organization in which industries are owned and managed by the workers".[1] Its theory and practice is the advocacy of multiple cooperative productive units composed of specialists and representatives of workers in each field to negotiate and manage the economy.

This.
I still think they're fun to read.

In the modern American system Hitler could've easily won an election
And I mean assuming he was born today not if he somehow came back to life and everybody already knew who he was

/pol/ actually got triggered and only read the title, kind of funny
Maybe I don't belong here, no. But I find evo-psych interesting if done well, unfortunately it hardly does that. And there are whole internet fringe groups who use it to justify their ideology.

I think that people who deny biology in the social sciences are just as bad.