How come the right wing successfully turned post modernism into a movement?

How come the right wing successfully turned post modernism into a movement?

Little of what Trump said during his campaign had any relation to reality, but his followers bought into it. They can look at a scientific fact like global warming and say it's socially constructed. They can support getting rid of healthcare for everyone else but somehow think it wont affect themselves. At the same tie they think they're the literal embodiments of facts and reason.

How did this happen, and is there anything we can incorporate from this?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=ib5F2hZOXc0
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2593100/
monoskop.org/images/4/43/Foucault_Michel_Discipline_and_Punish_The_Birth_of_the_Prison_1977_1995.pdf
rationalwiki.org/wiki/Postmodernism
youtube.com/watch?v=GvWMmkw8euc
jacobinmag.com/2017/05/saul-alinsky-alinskyism-organizing-methods-cesar-chavez-ufw

Read the book "Trust me I'm Lying" it apparently got passed around Trumps campaign office and I think I remember some quote about it being "our bible" or some shit. The guy who wrote it did the marketing for American Apparel. He would deliberately do sexually provocative ads, then call up feminist groups pretending to be a concerned citizen, then as soon as they got up in arms would call some right wing media friends so a shit show would start. All of this of course is great publicity, basically exactly what Trump did.

We've entered a period of very deep reaction and cultural twilight. This clip from Adam Curtis' documentary talks about it:
youtube.com/watch?v=ib5F2hZOXc0

I'm familiar with Adam Curtis. I'm just wondering why the right wing?

read moldbug

Post-modernism has more to do with the Right than the Left, historically speaking. It' s more aligned with Romanticism and counter-Enlightenment philosophy than with Rationalism and Enlightenment philosophy. The former is overwhelmingly reactionary. The latter, revolutionary.

essential reading for anyone that wants to understand the ideological basis for the alt-right instead of just ascribing malice

Don't trust idealists. That's it. That's the moral of this story.

...

Absolute drivel. Where do you people get this shit?


Define idealism.

Have you been living under a rock? Holla Forums gets triggered every time you mention something related to poststructuralism and the New Left

Probably because the New "Left" was a complete disaster.

Is Sorel an early example of this in action?

Disaster? It served its purpose extremely well.


Will happily gut any poster who takes it seriously. Foucault is decent though. Deleuze is good.

...

So what is it then? Seriously give us a definition. Because from what I have seen that's basically what it is. Idealist nonsense that for whatever reason is associated with marxism and the left.

Pot, meet kettle. You don't believe in genetics and statistics; they don't believe in global warming. The reason for that is exactly the same for both.

...

Post modernism is a form of relativism.

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧Curtis Yarvin🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

Citation needed and so on

Post-structuralism is fine, and once upon a time, the so-called New Left had some potential, I suppose, but that's long past, and it's turned out into a failure whose corpse has been broken up into fragments to be paraded about by the disparate sects that came after it

I really dislike the use of the word "believe" because it's almost always periphery to the meat of the discussion and usually thrown about when the person using it has nothing more to say. As for genetics and statistics, I'm assuming that you're referring to the racialist theories running around. If you understood the limits of both subjects then you would understand that it makes no sense to extrapolate from group statistics to something so individualized as genetics

But muh autism quotient

lel

But I thought the right wing was all about facts?

Postmodernism is just narcissism expressed with verbose language.

Most of the world doesn't believe in "genetics and statistics" by your standard, race and Autism Level dysgenics are a circlejerk of old tenured academics that ass pulled a bunch of questionable assumptions and got away with it because it was harder to disprove their claims than to make them.

That it did.

Postmodernism is a cultural movements, in the arts, literature, arhitecture, etc.
The alt-right is a cultural product of postmodernity (the epoch), but so is the contemporary left, etc.
Post-structuralism has little to do with the former, and only has a cursory relation to the latter. The alt-right has nothing to do with post-structuralism.

You know nothing about post-modernism.


This I can agree with.

OP, the belief of "multiple truths" has nothing to do with this. You are looking at opposing political views and trying to derive meaning. If the thread were about communism or feminism (both direct products of communist schools of thought) then you may have been on to something. As it stands though you have no idea what you are talking about.

*post-modern schools of thought. Fuck

The aut-right does not know what post-structuralism is, but they do love the logic that it uses to make gobbldygook out of every useful term until the entire argument boils down to lived experiences and subjectivity.

While you were reading Marx, I was reading Derrida. While you pondered over species being, I wrestled with synthomes. While you were spreading the daily star I was molding the DNA of the spectacle with meme injections.

And now that the world is on fire you have the audacity to come to me for answers?

That is one righteous piece of satire if it was in fact intended as such.

How big of a fucking retard do you have to be to think you extrapolate individual genetics from a trend of a group. You can't look at a person and say "this fuckers line has low impulse control because he belongs to this race". You gather data from individuals and extrapolate into a trend of a group, then there is a probability based on the population in general that come from many factors from the individual's experience. There is no different limits between these two things because they are the same thing. Judging an individual based off a general probability of their race is stupid, judging a race based off a general probability of their race is good policy.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2593100/

"Feels > Reals" while materialism as defined by Feuerbach and Marx will be "Reals > Feels"

Holy shit so many fucking libs on my campus jack off to this book it makes me sick.

Anyone have a PDF of this book? Seems interesting about I'd rather pirate it than give this scum money

this

I have never heard of a single good argument against him that wasn't shameful moralizing. Is this your mind on sectarianism?

His strategies or "rules" don't fucking work.

Except not as a joke?

Recommended watch

If all truths are relative and can be endlessly deconstructed, why not believe in whatever you feel like believing?

i never liked tool, shit band m8

Thus why even the contemporary liberal "left" is starting to abandon pomo. It's all fun and games until the reactionaries start appropriating your awful "philosophy" to justify their fucktarded politics.

Good try. How about you actually try reading Foucault instead of repeating the boogeyman version of post-structuralism that you heard on some le rational skeptic YouTube channel.

monoskop.org/images/4/43/Foucault_Michel_Discipline_and_Punish_The_Birth_of_the_Prison_1977_1995.pdf

Foucault is actually pretty interesting. However the real problem with post-modernism is not its actual philosophy but how it has been applied by the left and (more importantly) liberals from the 60s onward. It has somehow increase the importance and prevalence of idpol in western countries while also legitimizing neoliberalism. For that reason alone it should be thrown into the void.

I agree wholeheartedly.

I don't agree with the idea of it being "thrown into the void". There is something to a few of the ideas (which are very loosely connected and often contradictory) within PostModernism. I used to be much more interested in it, and have read a fair amount on it, but a turning point came when I realised that it is a method of funnelling all revolutionary activity into a practise with, pragmatically, achieves nothing to meaningfully change the world.
I can't be arsed to type more, so I'll just post these links that I hope will be of interest if you care to learn about the actual history of PoMo: rationalwiki.org/wiki/Postmodernism (fucking terrible title I know, but wholly distinct from the YouTube "rational skeptic" community)
youtube.com/watch?v=GvWMmkw8euc (He himself is an arse, but does he cares enough to do the proper research)

It just fits with rightist ideology so well. The only reason that Holla Forumsyps haven't picked up more of it is that they do not understand it. They could probably convert liberals by throwing linguistic philosophy at them.

peak Leftist intellectualism here


I giggled

Jacobin of all things basically destroyed him.
>jacobinmag.com/2017/05/saul-alinsky-alinskyism-organizing-methods-cesar-chavez-ufw

Do people actually willingly pump their heads full of his dogshit? If so, it looks like yet another generation is fucked.

You could say this about basically everything that humanities departments in American universities have advocated. muh privilege checking, corporate dick-sucking economics, feminazi age of consent laws, just war theory that exists entirely to fuel the military-industrial complex, the list goes on and on. American academia is just a political advocacy group at this point.

"Movements" are inherently conservative.

That is excepting real movements.

...

do you seriously think anyone that is a leftist "doesn't believe in genetics" ? or the idea of a universal human experience in general? serious question

hahaa the fucking comments on this video
please tell me this is ironic

what's wrong with this comment? he's absolutely right.
he may be retarded in real life, but what he said is correct

Trump won because of the following:

1) He promised to bring good industrial work back. Even if he can't do it, he came up with a fresh-sounding plan involving sealing the borders and jacking up tarriffs.

2) The Democrats screeched about racism and identity politics, proving they were out of touch with the hurting white working class. Yes, the white working class wants to seal the border. No, this isn't because of racism: It's straight economics: because they don't want more competition for low-wage jobs from illegal immigrants. They also dislike having their communities and culture disrupted by endless immigration. This is not racism – it is common sense. To say so is heretical to the left, however.

-He treated straight white America with some semblence of dignity and respect. You can take a man's job away, you can lower his income and lifestyle, but when you start shitting all over his culture, rubbing his face in forced diversity on TV, forcing him to use different pronouns to appease a tiny group of marginal people, and basically make fun of him 24/7 in the mass media, he gets angry. "Adding insult to injury" is more than just an turn of phrase.

The left may not like these facts, but until they 1) retool the angry, obsessive identity politics to something more balanced and 2) provide an economic way forward for the white working man, they will continue to be the target of ire.

Wrong, there are criticisms of pomo everywhere in art
pomo isn't obscurantism
ah, the classic "I don't understand you so you're a pseud"
no, it's not; scientism is a derogatory term for the attitude in that comment
displays massive ignorance of how we come to know things and what can be known; you learn this shit by reading any philosopher that isn't Hume
very few people are trying to do this, he's strawmanning; what people are really trying to do is show that empiricism is just one of multiple ways of finding information about the universe
??? you can't even do that, in any sane country
"i challenge you to prove your authenticity, and if you do then I've still won"
fits with the marble statue, which probably shows someone he's never read

The true question is: When the whole aut-right will die ?

When the aut(hentic)-left strikes back.

You are misreading the text. What he was doing was differentiating between postmodernism in art and postmodernism in academia. His point was that he was perfectly fine with postmodernism in art.


Well, the lawsuit shit is fucking crazy.

tell me when, please.

That's what *he* is doing, not what people in general are doing necessarily when they say "postmodernism is bad". Before the aut-right shit in fact, I only saw criticism of pomo in architecture and literature.

That's a damn shame, because there is plenty to criticise, the absurd fixation on language for example.

Uhmm…these things are incompatible you know.

Prior to the aut-right the only people using pomo shit were idpoling liberals and so were given a free pass by the neoliberal establishment. In a way these """ironic""" nazis are doing us a huge favor.

Eeh, I like it.

Why?

About as scientifically factual as a binge-watching session of Friday the 13th.

It is funny to watch actual nazis making the exact same philosophical arguments as intersectional feminists thus putting truth into the old invective "feminazi."

I only believe in our lord and savior jesus christ

there is no reals though behind those feels

Sure, because language is titally irrelevant in human matters, right? So irrelevant that no one should study it, right? Ffs

Why is this narrative peddled here when many post-structuralists* (like baldy in the OP) were Marxists? Is this more of the "no-true-socialist" puritanism peddled by the MLs or is it something more substantial this time? I'm getting very tired of Holla Forums retardation tbqh.

"Movements" are inherently conservative. Why are lefties convinced that they live in 19th century Bavaria?

i read a hard copy of the book but here's a pdf. The book goes into a lot of detail about how corporations use clickbait and the internet to manipulate the media. Definitely worth a read.