"just be weird!!"

>"just be weird!!"
>inspires Israel Defence Forces in their urban warfare to break down the walls of civilian homes and move through them instead of streets

Whoah.... so this is.... the power of French continental philosophy

Other urls found in this thread:

versobooks.com/blogs/1684-the-indians-of-palestine-an-interview-between-gilles-deleuze-and-elias-sanbar
haaretz.com/print-edition/features/an-obsession-called-israel-1.246270
electronicintifada.net/content/sartre-european-intellectuals-and-zionism/4384
youtube.com/watch?v=kyMbF2uuSIw
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

what is the point of threads like this? neck urself

fuck white people

"civilian" homes in the "peaceful" Gaza strip

who cares

lmao 68ers

Reminder that Deleuze thought the socialists were going to win in 68 and was surprised they didn't and the revolution amounted to nothing.

Meanwhile, truly rigorous thinkers like Clouscard foresaw how ridiculous this whole rebellion was and that it was simply another way for the Capital to accomplish itself.

I can't be bothered explaining Deleuze to you ressentiment filled plebs anymore. Start with "Nietzsche and Philosophy".

>"just be weird!!"
>inspires anglo-continental prophet from the future to summon an AI god to be born from the outside in and torture fuck humanity to death in a techno-lovecraftian acceleration towards a closed loop of perfect capital

fun fact: deleuze was pretty antisemitic

Proofs?

>anglo continental
oh god how disgusting

>"just be dialectical!!"
>inspires fascism and communism

just read this interview "The Indians of Palestine"
the comparisons are beyond lunatic
versobooks.com/blogs/1684-the-indians-of-palestine-an-interview-between-gilles-deleuze-and-elias-sanbar

>"There are no facts, only interpretations"
>inspires Trump

Why is this satire thread so accurate?

>be a faggot
>become OP

because satire easily becomes a simulacrum of the society

> not licking Israel's anus constantly? Antisemite!

lol no dude. but deleuze´ theory of nomads in a Thousand Plateaus goes in the very same direction. It´s not very different from Carl Schmitt.

citations required
>protip: you can't

His nomadology is about how to manage movement, space and private property. It has little to do with a particular people"s place in geopolitics, unless they actively organize in that way. Neither Israel nor Palestine does as far as I know. The Jews are not nomads in Deleuze's sense even if they are outside Israel.

> Dude, Nietzsche was a proto-SJW yuppie artist, you guys! Wee, creativity!

Idiotic bullshit. Deleuze was very good friends with Claude Lanzmann, the filmmaker.

> didn't read the book

> writes an analytic of schizophrenic cartographies
> he's not referring to schizophrenia at all just using it as a click-bait headline
> he actually means we need to think about the ontology of Brazilian transsexuals and consider experimenting with yoga
> paint a mural somewhere unexpected and make some performance art!

>i can´t be antisemtic, because i have a friend that´s jewish

haaretz.com/print-edition/features/an-obsession-called-israel-1.246270

I'm not wrong and what's even worse is that Deleuze bases a lot of his readings of Nietzsche on the shit Nietzsche's sister wrote...Lmfao.

That's so rhizomatic!

JIDF in full force today.

electronicintifada.net/content/sartre-european-intellectuals-and-zionism/4384

deleuze was an anti-zionist

> that pic

Kek'd and saved. But yeah, schizo means schizo. As in nuts.

What would be the ultimate military spec ops team composed of the deepest and most powerful philosophical thinkers? That could overcome any challenge and any level of opposing force?

Would Deleuze be one of them? Would Stirner?

Many anti-semites are pro-zionists. From Reinhard Heidrich to Anders Breivik.

t. Zizek

*sneaks Freudian-Lacanianism back into their anti-oedipal philosophy*

hehe, nothin personal, grad student

AHAHAHA

and philosophy departments and critical "theorists" still adore these hippie hacks

> what is Colli-Montinari edition?

Again, stop browsing /pol/ and read the book. I get it that this is a bait thread, but this bullshit was posted in serious threads as well.

Deleuze had bad lungs and almost fainted from an asthma attack while charged by riot police during a protest.

>Again, stop browsing /pol/

Dude, everyone has critiqued Deleuze's reading of Nietzsche. It's fucking terrible.

What do you like about it anyway? How Deleuze literally says philosophy should be like "fucking someone from behind?" Nice, deep.

you know he is right, though

deleuze read the "will to power", which was not officially edited by nietzsche

Paul "I can tell you that I am studied in military academies" Virilio.

Even Sokal and Bricmont basically gave him a free pass.

Semi-related: youtube.com/watch?v=kyMbF2uuSIw

>What, however, if there is no puzzled look, but enthusiasm, when the yuppie reads about impersonal imitation of affects, about the communication of affective intensities beneath the level of meaning (“Yes, this is how I design my publicities!”), or when he reads about exploding the limits of self-contained subjectivity and directly coupling man to a machine (“This reminds me of my son’s favorite toy, the action-man that can turn into a car!”), or about the need to reinvent oneself permanently, opening oneself up to a multitude of desires that push us to the limit (“Is this not the aim of the virtual sex video game I am working on now? It is no longer a question of reproducing sexual bodily contact but of exploding the confines of established reality and imagining new, unheard-of intensive modes of sexual pleasures!”). There are, effectively, features that justify calling Deleuze the ideologist of late capitalism.

>'But which is the revolutionary path? Is there one? - To withdraw from the world market, as Samir Amin advises Third World countries to do, in a curious revival of the fascist "economic solution"? Or might it be to go in the opposite direction? To go still further, that is, in the movement of the market, of decoding and deterritorialization? For perhaps the flaws are not yet deterritorialized enough, not decoded enough, from the viewpoint of a theory and a practice of a highly schizophrenic character. Not to withdraw from the process, but to go further, to "accelerate the process". These prophetic lines of Deleuze and Guattari (which legitimized in advance all the theoretical and practical reversals that the new left in power would shortly make), undoubtedly constitute the most coherent philosophical formulation of the contemporary liberal programme (as can be seen by the practical use that someone like Toni Negri stubbornly continues to make use of them); one that corresponds, in sum to the historical moment at which, the major political and cultural practices to its unlimited development having been finally dispelled, liberalism can now turn on its own foundation and as a function of its own logic, becoming in this way 'actually existing liberalism'. Foucault wrote that 'one day the century will be Deleuzean'. He did not realize what truth there was in these words.

>Anti-Oedipus. A marxist of mechanical bent might remark that the well-known success this work enjoyed coincided exactly with the Trilateral Commission beginning its reflections on the new problems of 'governability' faced by contemporary capitalism. this is a point that Michel Clouscard already perceived, in his particular way, back in the 1970s.

The Colli-Montinari edition that Deleuze and Foucault promoted did not include the original Will to Power, but a version in which all fragments were dated and arranged chronologically as opposed to the one edited by Nietzsche's sister.


Forget it, too much bait for me to handle.

nonetheless you can´t even use the fragments as part of nietzsches whole system, again they are just randomly organized thoughts and not integrated in his whole system of philosophy.

> quoting Zizek, a clueless Lacanian about Deleuze

This thread is beyond retarded. Thank God Jordan Peterson didn't mention Deleuze yet.

Nietzsche was against systematic philosophy as well as sheepishly following his words as Gospel. Besides, Deleuze wasn't even trying to be faithful to the authors, he was creating his own philosophy.

Nietzsche was anti-system

yeah he was anti-system, but nonetheless you can´t use random fragments to make about your own silly version of nietzsches philosophy

>Besides, Deleuze wasn't even trying to be faithful to the authors
an thats the point where it all went wrong

Reminder that real schizophrenics are autistic in D&G's philosophy, and autism is the enemy of their ontology.

What D&G are referring to when they say schizophrenic is actually something closer to "free spirited yuppie artist."

easy on the microfascisms lad...

I don't get what you have to gain by spouting these misunderstandings. We've had this discussion before in a different thread and I explained why you're wrong.

*right

There are a billion books on Nietzsche, there's no point in giving yet another summary.

then deleuze probaly should have read one to avoid his misinterpretations like nietzsche being anti-dialectic

Me and Nick land are among the few individuals to fully understand the implications of Deleuzean thought and achieve the BwO. It is no coincidence that we both went insane soon after. Six visits to the psych ward later after deterritorializing myself with hardcore psychedelics, I have now returned to the fold of Platonism. The ethics of difference, it would seem, end only in a padded cell or a coffin. For my mother's sake, I now adhere to virtue ethics. Kinda miss fucking bipolar scene sluts but then again that's probably how I ended up with HPV. I only hope my future wife can forgive me my immature philosophical infatuation.n

There are plenty of fragments in Nietzsche that go against standard hegelian concepts.

Please let this be a timeless pasta, forever to be included in Veeky Forums humor threads.

true. nietzsche dismissed hegels version of dialectic, although nietzsche hasn´t read much from hegel, but that doesn´t mean he himself wasn´t thinking dialectical, both hegel and nietzsche use heraclit of ephesos as their starting point in philosophy

Spinoza and his hellspawn infected you with daemonic thought forms.

Good that you sobered up. Platonism is benign.

fpbp

audible lel

>"just be free!"
>*ends history*

I would not be surprised if Guattari cucked Deleuze, given his edgelord anti-monogamy squad in the past.

Maybe, but Guattari was a womanizer while Deleuze was all about the BwO. Bitches love the BwO. Maybe they had kinky sex together though.

...

fukkin saved

nice

its a misreading. they thought BwO was literally shooting off peoples organs to smithereens.

dude, lanzmann is literally a zionist

Please elaborate on the Schmitt Deleuze connection

early fukuyama pls

No, they worked off concepts of deterritorialization, smooth and stratified space.

Zizek isn't wrong to say they are the ideologists of late capitalism.

bump