How to deal with publishers?

I written a book that I have submitted to a publisher ( the owner is my uncle) but the review board is making revisions to critical blocks. I have written them extensive contextual reasoning as to why these parts are critical, but they will not budge on the revisions.

How do you deal with publishers?

Here is opening. I ask that you critique it, unbiased.

1. Our Deficient Egos
We stoic few. We accept actuality in its naked form– truly its only form. There is no noumenal world. We that realize the waves of conflict crashing against us – disrupting us – are not fundamentally bent on destruction. There is no calculated intention beyond what is organized by people. Social conflict is a product of our evolution, and is not personal. There is no coincidence in any conflict. We all have desires that we wish to manifest into reality, and those desires, given the multitude of them, are bound to splash against each other in the sea of our society. Warring currents render a riptide, which is a vacuum of infertile effort. Those with strength and authority shall have their will fulfilled, stagnating their local sea until the tides of change disrupt their rule. Their capability is indicative of their greater intuition. Why is democratic will allowed to deny these people a status of authority? The capability of one million people is nothing without systematic continuity. What is communication without a single, dynamic language; what is commerce without established currency and provided conduits of transport; and what is a nation without intuitive, authoritative rulers to direct these variables that are the predicate of our culture?
Those that cloth their actuality in complexifying garments have clouded fancies. They wrongly define “essential,” failing to delineate it from their unnecessary desires. They self-impose validation and worth on their deficient lives, doing so under the pretense of “Human Rights”. Equality is a social construct, as are all contemporary dialectics of human being. I cannot blame them for having a false sense of self-worth, for completely negating one’s own ego creates an internal existential chasm that is intolerable. Ego is existential reason. There is no meaning outside of being. Useless people must redirect this directionless ambition to manifesting the ego of the productive among us. These proficient few, the rulers, instigate meaning where there would otherwise be lethargic stagnancy (by meaning, I imply organization). Let the egos of great men and women direct us, for we must realize that directionless minds plagued with fripperies are unfit in setting our direction! Let social productivity, stability, and prosperity be the thesis of our leaders’ egos. Let our leaders’ ego be the thesis of our desires.

Holy shit, that passage is tepid af.

I posted the 2nd rough draft, my apologies. It is similar enough to the final revision to pass the point. I am too drunk to post the final.

the pseuds of Veeky Forums dont care to elaborate on their statements. Whew.

The revision board said it was too aggressive... Damnit...

eat a dick

The first draft was much more aggressive, but they said it was too "intellectual". So I've simplified it.

What do you want? Explosions, fucking whores, and homosexual needle sharing? Jeez.
Maybe pic related will interest you.

>...as are all contemporary dialectics of human being.
Statements like this are deleted in the final revision. It is stupid for the most part, I know.

Also
>great women
was added for gender equality reasons... Fuck me in the ass

Unreadable garbage. Pretentious and contrived.

>Unreadable
Have you passed high school english? Use your eyes and process the symbols on the page and think about them instead of being lazy and blurting out the first thing you think.
I want to eat your ass.

Trash.

Can't believe people are new enough to not recognise pasta

Why is Veeky Forums so bent on denoting anything with a graduate level vocabulary as "contrived".
Yes, it may be slightly contrived, but urban hipsters will eat this arrogant bullshit up and perhaps merely buy the fucking book just because it has a "cool" and edgy thesis and cover. I'll make money while you post on here about how everything beyond your reading level is "contrived".

You should be happy anybody is willing to publish you at all.

Its not senpai, lmao.
I am the same user that posted this last time.

You should be happy your mom lets you persist suckling on her financial tit.
I will eat your ass. Let me pleasure you.

Lmao, what does Veeky Forums know about publishers? They barely know how to talk to women.

You won't make money if you don't make the changes they want. How does it feel that your work doesn't cut it ? Why not go with a different publisher ? Or does it have be with publisher because without your family connection you would not be able to get a look in? Do you think your a good writer ? Do you think people will look at you as someone who has earned their book to be published compared with the rest?

I am asking you to disconnect your perception of my work from this website. You perceive this website as a hub of weeaboos, and therefore think of this work as mediocre.
Tell me, in detail, what is garbage about it. Much of it is implicitly based on the works of Hobbes, Nietzsche. It depicts the first stages of an insane man. It is supposed to be chaotic. The second book (pic related) describes his transition to Christianity.

And no, I am not a good writer. I know how to bullshit. I build off the work of others.

I have approached Contemporary Books Publishing Group, and they said, with slight revisions, they would publish it. But my uncle is offering me high payouts. So why not.

Then what is the problem? I don't hate your work but it feels hollow and therefore it becomes boring. That is the worst fate of a book.

>mfw the initial topic hasnt even been discussed and instantly went to shitposting. Well then, ill just enjoy the rest of my night in the Sheraton hotel in Chicago. Lmao.

Thanks user. I suppose you cannot fully describe intuition. If you could, just describe how it comes across as shallow. I'd very much appreciate it. I am sorry if I am been uncivil. I am drunk. As seen here

Meant for

The problem with your writing isn't your message but how you deliver it. Your dilemma is that you know what the main idea behind your writing is since you wrote it yourself. That's why when you read your passage you understand it better than anyone else could. The Review Board dislikes your writing because they know the average reader doesn't have the same advantage as you.
The first issue a reader would have with your writing is your vocabulary. Big words can make you sound smart. But in writing the only purpose it serves is against you. A misconception with using "advanced" vocabulary is that it somehow adds to your logos. In reality, all it does it make it harder for you to communicate your ideas to the reader. That's what a writer does, or should do. Not try to impress strangers with his vocabulary but share ideas with others. If you can get the same point across using simpler terms then why would you make it harder for the reader?
Another issue with your writing is how long your sentences are. In general, long sentences aren't always bad as some authors can use it effectively . Faulkner is a good example of long sentences being bearable or even great in some cases. But in your writing some of it drags on for so long it begins to lose clarity. There may be meanings in your words that can only found in long sentences but not here. You don't want to force your reader to keep reading your writing. Then it no longer become enjoyable. Which causes the reader to lose interest in whatever message you want to deliver.

A good example of this in this excerpt:
> We all have desires that we wish to manifest into reality, and those desires, given the multitude of them, are bound to splash against each other in the sea of our society.
Great message, mankind is made up of so many dreams that they're bound to collide with each other.
This is proof to me that your ideas aren't bad. How you deliver it here is though. Here it could have divided into two different sentences. That would keep is simple to read while keeping the original idea intact.
>We all have desires that we wish to manifest into reality. Those desires, given the multitude of them, are bound to splash against each other in the sea of our society.
That little period makes it easier to stomach all that information.
Another example:
>These proficient few, the rulers, instigate meaning where there would otherwise be lethargic stagnancy (by meaning, I imply organization)
This sentence is hard to read by the length and word choice. Are these words making your concept clearer? Does "lethargic stagnancy" convey meaning that couldn't be found otherwise? They both are synonyms for inactive. If your goal is to create strong imagery for the reader this isn't how to do it. When you describe a bush you can say a large green bush. What you shouldn't say is spiky, thorny, bush. They're the same word so nothing is added.
And this is a personal opinion but:
>What is communication without a single, dynamic language; what is commerce without established currency and provided conduits of transport; and what is a nation without intuitive, authoritative rulers to direct these variables that are the predicate of our culture?
Where you put all these semicolons could have been period instead. These semicolons serve no purpose other than telling me you know what a semicolon does. And that means you care more about yourself than how your reader feels.

>That would keep is simple to read while keeping the original idea intact.
>That would keep it* simple to read while keeping the original idea intact.
So to answer your original question on how to deal with publishers clearly: Either make your writing easier to read or send them a letter that they're a bunch of circle-jerking hypocrites and post the results.

Sounds like you're trying to write a translation of some unrealised Turgenev novel. And for someone with this level of vocabulary (which saps your prose of any/all pleasure, don't take it as a compliment), your grasp of grammar and especially punctuation is flighty at best.

Do you realise your uncle is making fun of you by offering a "high payout" because he knows it's unmarketable trash?

Cool cover, but you're proving yourself delusional and completely out of touch with publishing if you think "urban hipsters" are going to a) buy books at all, and b) buy something that sounds politically irrelevant to them.