Never worked

>Debord
>existentialist

>existentialist-Marxism
>the same as existentialism
Nope.

But Debord is not "existentialist-Marxist" either, he didn't define himself as such and no one ever said he was this.

Sartre didn't define himself as such either. And yet he was the definitive one. You probably haven't read enough of either or do not know the academic historical context of Debora et al. The primacy of Sartrean concepts of Experience and Authenticity to Situationism is obvious.

>Situationism
this doesn't exist

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situationist_International
?

>a science

>The Situationist International strongly resisted use of the term "situationism", which Debord called a "meaningless term", adding "[t]here is no such thing as situationism, which would mean a doctrine for interpreting existing conditions".[2] The situationists maintained a philosophical opposition to all ideologies, conceiving of them as abstract superstructures ultimately serving only to justify the economic base of a given society; accordingly, they rejected "situationism" as an absurd and self-contradictory concept.[5] In The Society of the Spectacle, Debord asserted ideology was "the abstract will to universality and the illusion thereof" which was "legitimated in modern society by universal abstraction and by the effective dictatorship of illusion".[6] However, despite their insistence on this point, the term "situationism" is still occasionally used[by whom?] in reference to the Situationist International.
'?' yourself, noob

stirner is striner

debord - marxist stirner

>ywn be as smug as the french

>Rhetorical evasion constitutes a refutation
This is simply a meme because essentialism was so anathema in '68

what the fuck is that

>being told by a dead guy
>still arguing

flaneurism with a brain infected by continental philosophy

bitch please
>The Flâneurist International strongly resisted use of the term "flâneurism", which Baudelaire called a "meaningless term", adding "[t]here is no such thing as flâneurism, which would mean a doctrine for interpreting existing conditions".[2] The flâneurists maintained a philosophical opposition to all ideologies, conceiving of them as abstract superstructures ultimately serving only to justify the economic base of a given society; accordingly, they rejected "flâneurism" as an absurd and self-contradictory concept.[5] In Gentlemen Strollers Of City Streets, Baudelaire asserted ideology was "the abstract will to universality and the illusion thereof" which was "legitimated in modern society by universal abstraction and by the effective dictatorship of illusion".[6] However, despite their insistence on this point, the term "flâneurism" is still occasionally used[by whom?] in reference to the Flâneurist International.

>The Flâneurist International strongly resisted use of the term "flâneurism"

>Debord
>academic
How can you be so wrong?

>Situationism
Doesn't exist.

He killed himself so he did something right

>student uprising
>not an impotent and academic exercise

>situationism
The right term to describe the oeuvre of the situationist international. Like I said before, evasion is not refutation. Rhetorical arguments aside, The Bored was a hack.

So, what are the core tenets of "situationism"?

no u

Debord was anti-academic.

You think something like "situationism" exists, and that proves you don't know Debord enough to judge his writings.

What would core tenets have to do with it?

>you don't know bro but I do
>debord dindu nuffin he didn't coopt the class struggle for his flagging career as a public intellectual

The Paris riots of '68 were NOTHING without the wildcat strikes of the factory workers. SI was the Proto-OWS.

What is "situationism"?

You're so intelligent I can't understand your post.

See:
Why bother with these rhetorical games? Situationism, e.g. the ethos of the situationist international as expressed in their texts and actions can be succinctly described as lifestyle anarchism. And the writing is fucking boring. I'd rather read a Crimethinc poster.

>Situationism exists as a word but refers to nothing
How spooky

So anti-academic he wrote books and composed art films for a living.

you should not be
>>drunk most of the time
tho
Alcohol is most toxic drug

life is deadly desu

Debord is cool for the first two chapters of Society of the Spectacle but then he just turns into your boringly average Bolshevist with Pomo flair. If only he didn't succumb to Marxism and saw in his critique of spectacle a wider critique of all materialist mass-movements, but alas, he was just a dumb urban Frenchman.

>Situationism, e.g. the ethos of the situationist international
So Debord ceased to be situationist as soon as the Situationist International got disbanded?

>lifestyle anarchism
Not really.

>And the writing is fucking boring
The writing of who, and when?

Has anyone here read this? I actually prefer it to Society of the Spectacle. I used to own this edition but gave it away to a friend. It had typos anyway... does anyone know if the new version corrects them?

This is a good book too.

These are not academic books. What's the relationship with the academia? Debord never even was a college student.

>Society of the Spectacle

t. has never read any other Debord book

I bet that pleb hasn't even read Comments on Society of the Spectacle.

>what is his relationship with academia
Probably similar to your realtionship with your father desu

Your sardonic incredulity aside..
Yes, I suppose outside of participating in situationist international debord was not a situationist. That is the anti-essentialist idea in a nutshell anyway.

>not really
How not really?

>who? When?
Of Debord, when I read it.

All these pseuds reading books instead of creating situations tsk tsk

This.

Debord is not an anarchist, he always supported council communism. And the "lifestyle" thing is somewhat reductive.

Anyway, Debord changed his style several times, so 80s Debord has a largely different writing compared to 60s Debord (which is presumably the only Debord you know).

Situationism Mao Synthesis is the true revolutionary path.

Immediate Communisation by redguard flashmob cadres now!

Council Communism is functionally the same as anarchist communism. Lifestylism is pretty much an invention of '68, the revolution of "everyday life" and so on; like I said in the beginning it owes a lot to the ideas of Sartre regarding "authenticity".

I feel sorry for those leftists, I really do. They
desperately try justify their ideology with elaborate inchoate tomes full of hegelese gibberish. But it's all worthless. Post a single jpeg about crime stats and negroid cranial metrics and their whole egalitarian progressive ideology goes down the drain.

I feel sorry for those white supremacists, I really do. They
desperately try justify their ideology with elaborate inchoate tomes full of hitleresque gibberish. But it's all worthless. Post a single jpeg about Asian IQ stats and Jewish financial success and their whole racialist regressive ideology goes down the drain.

But this is not related to Debord, who invented nothing special in 1968, never wrote about "lifestyle" and wasn't an avid reader of Sartre.

Debord itself noted amusingly that he was credited for nothing in 1968, as the press only "discovered" his role in the 1968 events two decades later.

>Debord itself

himself* lol

>trying to divorce the author from his milieu
>didn't write about lifestyle
Except in his endless detournement which were all about lifestyle
>not an avid reader of Sartre
What does that even mean how acid would someone in 60's Paris have to be to not be influenced by influenced by Existentialism? You never even say anything about his ideas you just retort with empty assertions. You're really tempting me to read that boring text of his again simply to come back and btfo you larpers eternally

*how avid would someone have to be to be influenced...
Whatever I hope you get my point I'm going to go read a book now. Have fun with your super cool marginal writers club. I seriously just spent several minutes solving captchas to post this I hope your happy

Sartre was a PCF quasi-tankie while debord was a leftcom linked to council Communism, Lefebvre and Socialisme ou Barbarie.

How could a so called communist, never have worked?

>tfw I get called a marxist for rejecting crony captialism

good show america, good show

>walking as a revolutionary strategy
ffs situationists always calling whatever the fuck they do revolutionary
"I took a revolutionary nap"
"I drank some revolutionary water"

He didn't need too, his family was extremely well-off, owning several country houses.

You've gotta divorce French authors from their lifestyle, otherwise their philosophy becomes impotent and insincere.

Marxism is unfalsifiable pseudoscience, as is Debord's concept of the spectacle. You can trace a line from Debord's ideas to tumblr's obsession with 'representation' in media. Pure Marxism. No thanks, I think I'm sticking to skeptical rationality and classical liberalism.

Yeah, it's crazy that on boards like this they take jibberish like Marx seriously. All the best modern philosophers are on youtube. What a time to be alive. Top Kek

If you like youtube so much you fuck off there

>Marxism is unfalsifiable pseudoscience,
tell two falsifiable sciences

he is like me but successful

>Debord
>drinking water

Seriously, read him instead of making up stuff.

Debord studied Law at the University of Paris, but left early and did not complete his college education.

Source? Was it in 1951? I remember (perhaps incorrectly) he wrote that he never attended college. And he certainly kept a low profile about it, if it's true.

How did he write books if he didn't work? Did someone else write them under his name?

his mom did all the writing
true story

>The primacy of Sartrean concepts of Experience and Authenticity to Situationism is obvious.

>You can trace a line from Debord's ideas to tumblr's obsession with 'representation' in media.

'Representation' in the media is part of the spectacle numbnuts.

only girls should be this stupid

But what about the blacks?

What do you think a comma is for?

> You probably haven't read enough of either or do not know the academic historical context of Debora et al.

Ummm no sweetie, I read Veeky Forums every day

More Marxists for you bro. Second one was a devout Catholic, but we only know that to be a guise of true Marxists.

The image, or, What happened to the American dream by Daniel J. Boorstin
The Mechanical Bride by Marshall McLuhan