Is he Veeky Forums?

Do yourself a favor and read at least one critically acclaimed work by a black writer before talking out of your ass.
I recommend Giovanni's Room or Invisible Man. Maybe A Brief History of Seven Killings if you want something more contemporary. At the very least, read Of Our Spiritual Strivings by DuBois. It's like three pages.

I don't think about you at all

...

He's alright. I like his content, but if you actually pay close enough attention to it, he's just name-dropping out the wazoo.

>pay close enough attention
you don't have to pay very close attention tbqh

god i love the guy to the right, he's the greatest in silicon valley

Kool AD has way more tasteful name-drops.
He had a Heidegger reference in one of his songs iirc.

I strongly resent the assumption that I'v never read an acclaimed work by a black writer. In my public American high school alone I was forced by my progressive overlords to read

- Their Eyes Were Watching God
- Song of Solomon
- Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass
- Purple Hibiscus (possibly the single worst book I've ever read)
- the poems of Langston Hughes, Maya Angelou, and various Harlem Renaissance writers
- excerpts from the Autobiography[sic] of Malcolm X, Notes of a Native Son, and Olaudah Equiano

Obviously blacks were massively overrepresented in the school curriculum when you consider how few of them are even literate. Throughout the entire experience I only ever experienced two (2x) emotions: boredom or irritation.

I am convinced now more than ever that unmixed sub-Saharan Africans are simply too stupid to direct a narrative or interpret language at a Western or Oriental level. The "masterpieces" that progs force millions of teenagers to read every year exist simply to promote their political agenda i.e. to brainwash teens and convince blacks and fellow progs that the lower races can successfully imitate the intellectual achievements of whites and Asians. And if you're not given the tools to assess literary form, and if you teach kids to forbid themselves from criticizing black mediocrity, then unintelligent and easily influenced people can easily be fooled into believing that James Baldwin is an evocative writer with unique insights to offer.

t. angry brainlet

You're right. Have my (You).

This is nerd hub I'm on that David Foster Wallace so please foist your wallet xD xD

Schopenhauer attributed civilizational primacy to the northern "white races" due to their sensitivity and creativity (except for the ancient Egyptians and Hindus whom he saw as equal):

"The highest civilization and culture, apart from the ancient Hindus and Egyptians, are found exclusively among the white races; and even with many dark peoples, the ruling caste or race is fairer in colour than the rest and has, therefore, evidently immigrated, for example, the Brahmans, the Incas, and the rulers of the South Sea Islands. All this is due to the fact that necessity is the mother of invention because those tribes that emigrated early to the north, and there gradually became white, had to develop all their intellectual powers and invent and perfect all the arts in their struggle with need, want and misery, which in their many forms were brought about by the climate. This they had to do in order to make up for the parsimony of nature and out of it all came their high civilization."[65]

"With our knowledge of the complete unalterability both of character and of mental faculties, we are led to the view that a real and thorough improvement of the human race might be reached not so much from outside as from within, not so much by theory and instruction as rather by the path of generation. Plato had something of the kind in mind when, in the fifth book of his Republic, he explained his plan for increasing and improving his warrior caste. If we could castrate all scoundrels and stick all stupid geese in a convent, and give men of noble character a whole harem, and procure men, and indeed thorough men, for all girls of intellect and understanding, then a generation would soon arise which would produce a better age than that of Pericles."[74]

In another context, Schopenhauer reiterated his antidemocratic-eugenic thesis: "If you want Utopian plans, I would say: the only solution to the problem is the despotism of the wise and noble members of a genuine aristocracy, a genuine nobility, achieved by mating the most magnanimous men with the cleverest and most gifted women. This proposal constitutes my Utopia and my Platonic Republic."

but name another well known philosopher that rhymes with necromancer

>I post on reddit

yeah forsure. I'm sad he hadn't been featured at all in season 3.

Foremost, here's a contradiction in your argument
>if you're not given the tools to assess literary form, and if you teach kids to forbid themselves from criticizing black mediocrity, then unintelligent and easily influenced people can easily be fooled
You establish the prerequisite of education and critical thought in the appreciation of and the creation of works of artistic merit without acknowledging that literally every author you've cited was born and raised into a segregated nation to their disadvantage. That isn't to say anything of their work, just an immediate hole in your argument. I don't like almost any of the works you've listed except SoS. Frederick Douglass' work is literally an autobiography by a former slave who secretly taught himself how to read and write, despite the risk of punishment because slaves were not allowed to do so. And it's very well written. that fact alone puts your argument on thin ice, it's inconceivable to regard that work as "mediocre", a criticism marked by your teenage insights against the will of your "progressive overlords". You're trying very hard to sound intelligent and I'm just not convinced that you're anything more than an idealogue trying to leverage your misguided notions by imitating those more intelligent than yourself.
Top that off with your "criticisms" of Baldwin offering no unique insights and you've gone and threw what little critical relevance you had left out the window. Your ideology is showing, sort yourself out.

He's good and nice

Go to bed, Milo

Milo is what Veeky Forums actually is but he's definitely not what Veeky Forums aims for

That's not a contradiction. You clearly did not read the post at an intellectually competent level because you are an ideologue who has been trained to view any questioning of black mediocrity as simply a reflection of a bias which only you and your political allies are privy to. It was a bad faith approach and thus your analysis is extremely weak and easily refuted.
>You establish the prerequisite of education and critical thought in the appreciation of and the creation of works of artistic merit without acknowledging that literally every author you've cited was born and raised into a segregated nation to their disadvantage. That isn't to say anything of their work, just an immediate hole in your argument.
The acknowledgement of the role of culture in black or white inferiority is not a contradiction of the role of genes and biology. Black cultural inferiority is a product of both a culture that celebrates stupidity and, objectively speaking, a lower cognitive potential than Europeans or East Asians. It's completely dishonest to pretend that mediocre but modern black writers like Adichie did not have access to education in their country (she had one of the best her admittedly low IQ nation could offer), and it is furthermore dishonest to pretend that I did not expressly acknowledge that only the easily influenced and unintelligent would be significantly affected by the harm of a progressive education. I'm sure that segregation kept many blacks from writing terrible books (maybe we should bring it back) but when you make the leap of implying that segregation is what caused them to write terrible books with no absolutely no evidence then we're approaching the realm of puerile fantasy. Historically speaking, blacks have never had any skill with language which segregation could somehow remove.
> I don't like almost any of the works you've listed except SoS. Frederick Douglass' work is literally an autobiography by a former slave who secretly taught himself how to read and write, despite the risk of punishment because slaves were not allowed to do so. And it's very well written. that fact alone puts your argument on thin ice, it's inconceivable to regard that work as "mediocre", a criticism marked by your teenage insights against the will of your "progressive overlords".
First of all, it's very poorly written, and pretending that it's extremely well-written outs you as somebody who believes what you are told believe because you have no critical faculties yourself. Secondly, I don't quite understand how it refutes a single thing I say. A mediocre black man training himself to write at a fourth grade level is impressive in a sort of a "Ripley's Believe it or not" way, but it's hardly proof that he was able to actually achieve anything of intellectual significance.

The rest of your post is mostly resentment over having been preemptively bested in the intellectual combat and not worth acknowledgement, as it has no relevance to the discussion

this

preach, he nailed that character

>I'm still stuck on murakami
how?

a guy who cannot find the joy that any other Veeky Forums reader finds when reading e.g. Baldwin because he's five layers deep up his own ass in a scrupulously curated and "intellectually" defended racism.

>muh sub-saharan IQ buzzwords
you faggots want to colonize this board. you were given your containment space for a reason. fuck off.

baldwin did a nice take-down of nation of islam, so i don't see why redpill fags have such a hissy fit over him

well maybe "take-down" is too strong but you could tell he didn't dig them, or go watch him "debate" with malcolm x, he's talking about transcendental themes of art and literature and malcolm x is like "muh injustice, need moar gibbs"

yes

I like him cause he reminds me of me, but if I grew up on the receiving end of a deeply racist society.

>he reminds me of me
so you're a namedropping pseud?

Yeah and everyone else here too.

There is no distinction between a pseud and a "real" intellectual.

Huge pseud who namedrops and references literary topics without actual merit

yeah sounds like Veeky Forums

A real intellectual is successful, and labelled as an intellectual by society at large.
A pseud is unsuccessful, and labels himself as an intellectual first and foremost.

Correct

1. Why is success a marker for intellectualism?
2. Is society, by and large, intellectual?
3. If no to answer two, then how can they rightly declare someone an intellectual?
4. Do intellectuals not consider themselves intellectuals?