Who /situationist/ here?

Who /situationist/ here?

Other urls found in this thread:

rhizome.org/editorial/2013/may/7/cavalier-history-situationism-interview-mckenzie-w/
nytimes.com/2017/02/20/opinion/trump-and-the-society-of-the-spectacle.html
cddc.vt.edu/sionline/si/definitions.html
dazeddigital.com/artsandculture/article/18826/1/shia-labeouf-crashed-an-lcf-lecture-to-read-to-students
huffingtonpost.ca/2016/04/27/valeant-pharmaceuticals-ceo-says-he-has-regrets-over-drug-price-hikes_n_9786296.html
forbes.com/sites/bartiescott1/2016/03/16/valeant-ceo-michael-pearson-lost-two-thirds-of-his-billion-dollar-fortune-in-a-year/
deserter.co.uk/2017/02/deserters-in-history-guy-debord/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Depends what you memean.

me, I guess. you wana talk about something or just circlejerk? i'm up for both.

Why not both and in public to break the spectacle?

I was told im a situationist here once. I have no idea what that means.

It's person that says Karl Marx work although very important is still a work from a very long time and some things need to change in order to adapt to the situation of present days.

Situationists were a French Marxist group that thought modern western societies capitalist ideology had reached hyper-speed through mass production and mass media called the spectacle that enamored every day working class schlubs into a cultural prison.
In order to break the spectacle and cause revolutionary fervor you would need to engage in acts of situational revolutionary actions where you show the hypocrisy of capitalist ideology and the break down of the system. Remind people that life is not as the spectacle shows it and instead is just regular old boring capitalism under the surface of ideology.

Hence the breaking the glass picture because it says break it le joke.

What I originally said that got me called that was saying how my political stances of what I support differ depending on what the most realistic and reachable options I have for any specific country at any specific moment in time. I also think you should change how people think not just policy changes.

Is Martin Shkreli the ultimate situationalist?

Yeah, in the same way that Rebecca Black's Friday is the ultimate satire of modern pop music.

Shkreli argues that companies do what he does all the time and people are only upset he put a human face to price gouging. He even named companies and listed off what they did when asked.

I wasn't disagreeing, just adding the caveat that I don't think it's intentional.

It doesn't look like it, but there are a couple of things that make me think twice about it. When he was young his siater was sick and his family couldn't afford medication, and he plans to spend the profits on researching drugs which normally corporations wouldn't bother with. His price gouging only affects insurance companies too and if you aren't covered you can hit him up on twitter to get it for free.

There's a bit more to Situationism than the spectacle.

rhizome.org/editorial/2013/may/7/cavalier-history-situationism-interview-mckenzie-w/

…huh
I wouldn't have thought the media would be portraying someone to be more ruthlessly capitalist than they really are.

His PR team at the start was atrocious and when he realised he literally could not do a worse job if he tried he sacked them and started hamming his villain role up. He bought the only copy of a Wu Tang album just to hold hostage afterwards and call Wu Tang sellouts, threatening to snap the CD if they kept shit talking him, assembling a posse to make a video to shit talk them on TMZ and the only clause Wu Tang can get it back is if they steal it in some comedy hijinks caper style way. When he does livestreams you can see he lives in a pretty normal, bland apartment with just a guitar and some stuff lying around. I find his antics pretty amusing overall.

Who /communistegoist/ here?

an academic poser

Who /christianislamicnihilistegoistanarchostalinisttranshumanistfascistcap-communism/ here?

Into the trash

nytimes.com/2017/02/20/opinion/trump-and-the-society-of-the-spectacle.html

“The Society of the Spectacle” is still relevant today. With its descriptions of human social life subsumed by technology and images, it is often cited as a prophecy of the dangers of the internet age now upon us. And perhaps more than any other 20th-century philosophical work, it captures the profoundly odd moment we are now living through, under the presidential reign of Donald Trump.

who /tiqqunista/ here

hate the game, not the player

shrkeli is /ourguy/

...

i feel like tiqqun is bretty easy to get.
your mileage may vary, of course.

They make so many references maybe I'm just not cultured/French enough.

"Situationism"

Literally isn't a real thing. It's just a slur for the SI, there is no ideology about it, it's just people who subvert media using their methods

If intentional, that's actually a very clever case of détournement.

I'm currently reading this is not a program, but i'm still in page 90
agreeing with what they say so far, but it's quite confusing

The spectacle is a drug for slaves. It is designed not to be taken literally, but to be followed from just out of reach; when this separation is eliminated, the hoax is revealed.

have you read Debord?

Have you?
cddc.vt.edu/sionline/si/definitions.html

Is he, dare I say, /ourguy/?
dazeddigital.com/artsandculture/article/18826/1/shia-labeouf-crashed-an-lcf-lecture-to-read-to-students

is it normal to approach this stuff with an attitude that amounts to "I kind of sort of vaguely get it" while being aware that you simultaneously don't, or at least feel you don't.

it's not complete nonsense to read, as delving into a physics paper unprepared might be, but there's still a feeling of being totally out of one's depth. that's my experience with The Society of The Spectacle anyway could just be i'm dumb though.

tiqqun is an example of what happens to an intellectual in late capitalism

to read tiqqun you'd best know the SI, Giorgio Agamben's "Coming Community", and Heidegger.

Yes, that's completely normal. The attached pdf should help. In general you should at least understand commodity fetishism and reification.

me again. I mean to say while I like Tiqqun and their outlook I feel like they are pedaling their legs without a real movement or mechanism through which to apply their intellectual force, so in a way they are sad. I agree with Bloom theory and with the anthropological dimension of their analyses. Sometimes I get confused with their jargon of "Figures" (I am really not too familiar w Heidegger) vis Publicity, Spectacle, Gift, etc. What is a Figure of what, and what is a Figure anyway?

Someone should introduce him to Nazbol

Really get him turnt

bump

People on leftist circles use the most disparate words to insult their neighbor.
A lot of lefties think situationism is pretentious postmodernism, so he was probably trying to say that you're some kind of lifestylist or some shit.

There was actually a very valid sounding conspiracy amongst the /n/atsoc IRC that he'd been paid off by his former employers (Valeant) to perform his hijinks as they hiked their prices just a day before he blew up.
he wasn't, both of them were surprised to find the other before the SEC for the same thing. It literally was a 🍀🍀🍀pure coincidence🍀🍀🍀. They had no idea what he was up to either. They also weren't giving it away to people who needed it for free, either
I must say his old boss is the most utterly perfect representation of "the porky." I just wanna cuff him to a bench and spend all day squeezing his big ol' chubby cheeks.
huffingtonpost.ca/2016/04/27/valeant-pharmaceuticals-ceo-says-he-has-regrets-over-drug-price-hikes_n_9786296.html
forbes.com/sites/bartiescott1/2016/03/16/valeant-ceo-michael-pearson-lost-two-thirds-of-his-billion-dollar-fortune-in-a-year/
He's also getting every bit of the shitkicking he deserves.

hello


I'd say Baudrillard is more relevant. Debord still believed antagonism hasn't been absorbed by the system, that meaningful opposition is still possible. Foucault and Tiqqun have this problem as well, but at least they repeatedly call for the civil war to be intensified which makes them better propaganda material.

Yeah, sure, as long as you don't merely plow through the book once and then put it away for good. Sometimes these books are intelligible only if you already hold similar views so they merely clarify and expand on them and/or write them down in an entertaining way.

Why do you think it is no longer possible?

deserter.co.uk/2017/02/deserters-in-history-guy-debord/