Why aren't you a Situationist Veeky Forums?

Try to think of Derive as a game in which you are tasked to find the secret messages of urbanism. How the organization of things and places in the city promotes more spectacular relations, how the ambient gestalt is the medium in which capitalism can grow.
It comes from a surrealist pratic (deambulation), and it's wise to try it with a surrealistic approach: try wandering aimlessly along your usual rotes looking for repeating patterns.

Because even the situationists knew they were wrong. Their is a reason the movement is dead

The situation that can be spoken of is not the true situation.

Ah, that's clearer. I tried it the other day but realized I didn't really know what I was looking for.

Do you have any recs for other Situationist texts? I've only read Society of the Spectacle and watched a couple Situationist films (my favorite being Can Dialectics Break Bricks?, it's damn funny)

because i take sowell's basic economic over debord's ponderous continental gibberish any day. you can trace a striaght line from the situationists to sjws who obsess over lgbt pocwoc 'representation' in media. At the core of both visions lies a refusal to take responsibility for oneself. like nobody's forcing you to buy anything dude.

advanced economics > basic economics

lgbtq poc "representation" shitters are part of the problem that Debord outlines.

>At the core of both visions lies a refusal to take responsibility for oneself.
How?

>like nobody's forcing you to buy anything dude.
The Spectacle is far more about just advertising, you fucking dolt.

>How?
situationists were a gang of unemployed drunks, just like the self proclaimed 'artists' you'll find in any major city. It's an ideology designed to appeal to unemployed liberal arts grads. and what solution are these people offering? communism? more power to the state? good god, how many times does marxism have to fail for you to understand it doesn't work?

In fact, you could argue the 68 generation is in power right now. the people who learned all they could learn from Foucault, Marcuse, Mao, Derrida, and Debord are now the liberal establishment

You've still said nothing about their actual theories, user.

Situationism is old hat, read Baudrillard.
>and what solution are these people offering
Politics isn't "solving problems" it's struggle and power. You don't "offer solutions", you fight.

quads confirm
Watch Debord's own film adaptation of Society of the Spectacle
Read Comments on the Society of the Spectacle, written in 1988 by Debord, and The Revolution of Everyday Life by Vaneigem, the other major SI text.
>communism? more power to the state?
LMAO
M
A
O
>the liberal establishment
Which failed the US election because they didn't listen to any of them, or even scum like Alinsky, on whom Clinton wrote her senior thesis.

A fast rising star of early Lettrisme, Ivan Chtcheglov, wrote the founding document of another Masonic organisation, the Situationist International. Formulary For A New Urbanism is a bold statement that makes typically ambiguous use of Masonic coded language in both its title and the main body of the text, by these means Chtcheglov laid the foundations for the Situationist's esoteric use of architectural and geographical imagery. The work begins with the observation that 'there is no longer any Temple of the Sun'.

The Lettristes, and later the Situationists, were deeply disturbed by the fact that within 33rd degree Masonry the final syllable of the secret word JAHBULON was widely understood to refer to the Biblical city of On - more recently Heliopolis - during the period in which the monumental architecture erected to honour Ra, the Sun God, was re-dedicated to Osiris, the God of the Dead. As far as these post-war Parisian Qabalists were concerned, most Masons were making a fundamental theological error in taking their Light solely from Lucifer - referred to as Baal but corrupted to BUL within the secret word for God. Both the Lettristes and the Situationists felt that ON symbolised a broad period of Egyptian history and thus a sense of balance between darkness and light.

The Neoist Alliance considers the Situationist obsession with harmony - usually expressed negatively through the use of what profane eyes misread as 'political' terminology clustered around the concept of 'reification' - to be one-sided. However, this does not blind us to the beautifully poetic way in which the SI developed the deeply coded form of Qabalah that Marx learnt from Hegel.

Returning briefly to Chtcheglov, he later revealed that the 'secret chiefs' who controlled the Situationist International were based in Tibet, as had also been the case with a British forerunner of the group, the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn.

The simultaneous realisation and suppression of Masonry will establish convincingly that in the many different - and necessarily mutually exclusive wills of wo/mankind - there is a common will that cannot be renounced. Since the notion of the 'total man' has been decisively exposed as an aristocratic fraud, our individual concerns are undoubtedly our only salvation. Three cheers for the Egoist who thinks only of herself! Once Masonry is realised and suppressed, social disintegration will be re-established at a higher level. From this time forth, religion in realising itself, will celebrate in feast its inability to reconcile darkness and light. The spontaneous appearance of division in unity and unity in division, make it unnecessary for the Lion to lie down with the Lamb.

Humanity is the Devil, mean and corrupt, a liar blinded by her own deceptions - and so out will come the tricolour cockades and ribbons, decorating everything that is without consequence. Religion will separate itself from beauty too! Jacques de Molay, thou art avenged!

see, french stalinist intellectuals were exposed as apologists of totalitarianism , so they needed a new racket, hence, situationism, postmodernism, poststructuralism, etc. it's all the same shit, pure sophistry, characterised by a seething contempt for european culture and classical liberal values.

Sure do love my nonsense

>situationism, postmodernism, poststructuralism, etc. it's all the same shit
Go back to your containment board

Debord defends pre-Spectacle works about as much as Veeky Forums

situ is a left-com tendency stupid.

>Communists and Anarchists are actually Fascists! meme

Just started reading this, mainly because I also want to read the later critique by the author.
Honestly didn't expect all the marxism going in. How should I look at that in the context of the rest of the word?

>word
*work

...

who else wants to play Debord's board game?

Situationists are marxists who look for some golden mean away from both authoritarianism and anarchism.

Keep reading and don't forget: , Debord was right and is /ourguy/.

It's very heavily marxist, but it also doesn't really require the reader to know all that much about marxism to understand his basic points. Just keep in mind that when he talks about Commodity, he's not talking merely about commercial objects, he's talking about the cult around them and how they've become relationships in themselves. Society of the Spectacle, in a way, is really just a further articulation of Marx's idea of Commodity Fetishism:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_fetishism

Alright, that's good to know.
The part about the struggle for power between the marxist and anarchist factions of the International is pretty interesting.

>The Spectacle
muh spectacle is a completely meaningless term that can refer pretty much to everything and hence to nothing. That's the one trick those french social marxist pomo faggots know. debord:spectacle, foucault:power, derrida:deconstruction, baudrillard:simulacra. completely meaningless buzzwords

>completely meaningless buzzwords
Except they're pretty clearly defined in their actual works. There's a whole nifty book that explains exactly what Debord means when he says Spectacle.

>tfw I love reaction videos
>tfw I also have a ritual of watching recordings of grown men play videogames while I eat

What a time to be alive.

oh yeah? well, why didn't he put spectacle in the title then? checkmate.

I want summer to be over

Report on the Construction of Situations, On the Poverty of the Student Life and the first numbers of their journal, then Revolution of Everyday Life and Sos + Commentaries, then the minor texts if that's your thing + Critique of Everyday Life if you feel like it

I have but sadly the english translation is kinda whack

Ironic shitposting is still spectacular

are there any other philosophers that focus on a "world mediated by images" line of thinking?

i know about debord, zizek and baudrillard.

Marshall McLuhan and Neil Postman

how does Marx deal with supply and demand

kapitalism101.wordpress.com/2010/01/12/law-of-value-10-supply-and-demand-draft/

Because I've read Debord's "Commentary on the Society of the Spectacle" aka we're fucked and my philosophy can't do anything F.

Because they're old and busted. Bookchin is the new hot leftist

i've always been suspicious of that dude, given he was an israel supporter and his disciples in syria are building 7 different USA military bases. hmmm.

tell me more

I find it interesting how much Marxist's hamfisted rants about the nature of Capitalism line up with Marxism itself: working its way into everything, existing solely to give its creators power, viewing people solely as disposable drones to be used for profit and nothing more, subverting and perverting everything, censoring any and all views that disagree with it, constantly shifting blame away from itself and adopting new forms so as to find a new batch of gullible hosts.

I guess it just goes back to what Alinsky said: accuse your opponents of everything nefarious about yourself and everything scandalous you intend to do. That way, no one can point out your flaws without it looking like "no you!". It's a clever little trick, I'll give him that.

kek I knew who you meant as soon as you said parka

Unsung savior of socialism right there

What are their realistic options though?

>jewish israel supporter
>argues against nationalism
lmao

i am tho

Because at best Debord was a parodist, and at worst a plagiarist. None of his ideas were his.

Because I'm not a literal cuckold like Debord was at the end of his life and and I've already read Marshall McLuhan and Friedrich Kittler who completely destroy anything Debord said

Fight for what purpose? Or just flail your arms around pointlessly like a spaz?

Any recs on mcluhan? Found him through the 3x3 thread but don't know where to start. How does he disprove Debord?

i am a scruffy, ungainly student. i haev a parka and i get swept up in student activities w/ my naivety. if you dont repost this comment on 10 other pages i will fly into your lecture tonight and make a mess of your papers

>In fact, you could argue the 68 generation is in power right now.

So you're saying they took responsibility for themselves.

>and what solution are these people offering? communism? more power to the state?
do you always post about authors you haven't read a page of?

well, which is it? are they unemployable drunks with useless arts degrees or are they political savvy careerists? you can't be both.

Ironic shitposting is still shitposting

Whos ideas were they the? Genuinly curiouse

The hoops that people jump through to rescue the meme of objective value are astonishing.

Marx deals with the capitalist system as a totality. The capitalist concept of value makes no sense outside the capitalist mode of production.the commodity cannot exist without a system of alienated labor, property and wages. The sovereign subjectivity of the consumer unit is embedded within a cultural system of commodity fetishism. Mainstream economics carries tons of assumptions about human nature, reality and epistemology. Isn't it sad to adopt the consumer unit as the be all end all of human subjectivity?marx sees capitalism as a fundamentally social people managing system. Instead of focusing exclusively in the theoretical construct of the utility maximising individual, Marx aims for the bigger picture. Capitalist society produces not for use but for profit and exchange. Its apologist confuse capitalism for a manifestation of the unchanging law of the universe itself, Marx thinks things could be otherwise.

Why are or aren't you a situationist OP?

lol

My master's thesis is due in two days fuck you

One would hope that the be all and end all of human subjectivity can one day be more than the capitalist consumer unit or the Marxist worker unit, and actually a human being.

When you take a completely outdated theory of value, use that to create the myth of "surplus value" to feed the myth of capitalist exploitation, and then conveniently reduce all the rest of human existence to footnotes to economics struggle, you can't expect to end up with any substantial solution to the modern human condition.

>it's the marxists fault we live in capitalism
lmao

what?

i have never read it

Quality posts
That's not what user is saying at all

There is also the Situationist International Anthology in English.

Waste of dubs.

>the Marxist worker unit, and actually a human being.
Marxism is all about abolishing the proletariat, not celebrating it or eternalising it. Marx ultimately was a humanist, who looked forward to the abolition of the dictatorship of the political economy

Freaking Carl Mark ruining threads and lives.

Marx ultimately was a stupid fag who didn't want to get a real job

see you at the lecture bitch

horrible pasta

oh but I am

Churchill was right, tho

All jobs are fake, brother

how can jobs be real if the value of our wages isn't real

>When you [have developed a theory of the modern human condition] you can't expect to end up with any substantial solution to the modern human condition.

or is it possible that solution (violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie) is embarrassing to you?

Let's emancipate ourselves from Marx.
It's embarrassing to anybody, really.

Too busy.

Is this comic seriously trying to promote Lenin's laughing stock of propagandistic ideas meant to trick Russian peasants?