Why is the modern left unable to talk about how alienation affects people...

Why is the modern left unable to talk about how alienation affects people, and what they should do to solve it (except when it relates to feminism). Why is it such a taboo subject?

Even that nagle chick who wrote kill all normies, recognizes how the absence of discussion of these issues in leftist circles fuels the alt-right, but even she herself admits that she cannot think of a viable solution.

Why aren't there people devising new ways to tackle these social issues just like how there are leftist intellectuals that are trying to solve the unique economic issues of the day.

Please enlighten me

Other urls found in this thread:

iep.utm.edu/castoria/
base.mayfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/cornelius-castoriadis-the-imaginary-institution.pdf
theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/07/the-end-of-men/308135/
libcom.org/files/Wendy_Brown_States_of_Injury_Power_and_Freedom_in_Late_Modernity__1995.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Cuz that shit will only be solved by capitalist sex dolls.

Because very few people, including Marxists, have the fortitude to not just intellectually understand something but emotionally as well.
Christians do this as well, ignore all the things Jesus said about poor people while brow beating everyone that doesn't accept their religion.

Because women need to be stripped of their "rights" and the patriarchy must be reinstituted but nobody has the courage to admit this.

This simply isn't true. Actually, a lot of people in the feminist movement have recently taken a look at the state of people in MGTOW and the Alt-Right and realize what they've created.
I saw a documentary on this , forget what it was called tho

Pretty much this. Occasionally Marxists can manage this – Fromm is an example – but generally they are reptilian in nature.

same guy here. just remembered it's called The Red Pill

Stop right there my friend. I recognize that you believe we now live in a very gynocentric society where women objectively have the upper hand. I also realize that you think a patriarchy will benefit you by putting you in the advantageous position.

Before you shitpost anymore, I want you to think. Is there any way we can structure society to achieve a good social life for all people without having one gender above the other?

No because women are objectively inferior to men. They NEED to be chained.

women are the biological bourgeoisie. they only fuck assholes and criminals while telling nice guy virgins that they're "not entitled to sex" and you end up with psychologically insane incels like Elliot Rodgers
and then they wonder why it happened and start asking for gun laws to be passed or something.

The modern left has swallowed the poison-pill of cultural capitalism by accepting the neoliberal marketplace as a mediator in qualms with traditional society.

Since older forms of community featured various types of oppression such as racism, sexism, slavish deterrence to authority etc. it is perceived by the Left that its better to accept the hyper-atomized individual of late capitalism rather then the fetters of community which could act as a break upon (but not stop) capitalist accumulation.

Solidarity becomes much harder when no one can rely on anyone but themselves and that's the whole point of the capitalist cooption of the Left's cultural agenda.


These are examples of some of the cultural demands we are presented with on the part of cultural capitalism. For understandable reasons most leftists would rather not go backwards on certain issues but the cost is we end up accepting our role in the false-choice between "traditionalism" and cultural capitalist modes of life.

The demolishment of life-long partnerships, close-friendships, and an overall loss of a sense community reproduces the alienation of capitalist economic forms throughout our social lives. The average person finds themselves unable to comprehend the problem as they no longer confront a greedy boss but a whole world of social calamity, which makes it hard to perceive that what seems to be many problems may all actually be the same problem. We often forget that the sense of community inherited from pre-modern society was often one of the proletariat's most powerful weapons in the struggle against the capitalist class.

We need alternative communities, but its quite clear that anarchist communes that seek to build these alternative communities are insufficient and operating in a backwards fashion. A proletarian community already exists and is instituted and now the job of radicals must be to give it new form and meaning.

In the late 19th and 20th centuries, one thing that socialist parties in Europe did quite effectively was to really take-over the role that the Church once played in social life within working class communities. We don't fulfill our goals by inventing a new modern socialist mythology as Jim Jones tried to do but by creating organization that people can fit within the frames of their daily lives.

So, maybe a NEET might find a place as a party worker or in part of a socialist youth group that might be centered around a social recreational activity of some sort. Addicts might receive free support in their struggle against addiction from the party.

What might have to begin outside the workplace could lead to renewed support for workers within it building workers organizational power directly inside the capitalist machine itself.

I'm really not sure what to do about this problem outside of the obvious revolution but I'm just throwing out some ideas here.

I know you feel this way because you've been ignored by women or whatever. I'm sure it feels terrible. But if you let that bleed into your politics, it makes you irrational

Consider the following, how can you create a new patriarchy without banning all the things that make it irrelevant. ex. Birth control, technological advancement that make it so brute strength isn't necessary to live a normal life, ability to work that make it so women don't need to rely on men to be breadwinners

Women didn't become like this because of muh feminism. Everywhere in the world that is modernizing is creating these "independent women"

It's a material problem, not an ideological problem

Actually making birth control illegal and divorce and abortion impossible again outside of extenuating circumstances would do wonders. Women's liberation does not benefit me as a male whatsoever and is poisonous to society in general and there is absolutely no reason for me to uphold it. Sorry, not sorry.

When women don't have abortion rights or free dress codes, then they have a problem.
But when virgins are being created en masse who are prone to turn into robots or nazis who run over 20 people or stage massacres in Isla Vista, then WE have a problem.
I know this is hard to understand since you don't know what the thought process of someone who's never fucked a woman is like.

Implying Saudi Arabia.

Very modern state, still super conservative and reactionary.

Is Holla Forums THE chad board?

Has everyone here fucked?

It certainly causes people to be less reactionary

Women's liberation has destroyed long term heterosexual relationships and child rearing en masse on a societal level and completely poisoned the idea of a healthy family.

I don't get why you feel it is impossible to create a society that has both genders on a equal playing field, but also encourages things like forging strong relationships and monogamy


A state which requires it's women to wear garbage bags and cannot drive. If patriarchy can only be enforced in modern society with policies that extreme then its not really viable


Having sex doesn't make someone a Chad. I've had gfs, but personally I've been single for over a year.

But it's a modern state and it's super viable.

There's also Iran right next to it.

when did I say this? quote me. I'm not the Nazi poster.
all I'm saying is that this idea that "men aren't entitled to sex" is completely false and quickly leads to intense, fatal, social issues. OP is right in that too few people want to or care to address this problem.

...

You're forgetting that the /r9k/ definition of Chad is so loose that you basically are one if you've physically touched a girl, even if that girl was your sister.

I wouldn't go that far, but resentment can indeed be deflated at least marginally by human contact – sexual or otherwise.

If it is literally happening right now why on earth is it not viable?

You want to know what is truly not viable? A society where 80% of the women fuck only 20% of the men. The society in which we live in. That is not viable.

Feminism will literally be responsible for the most vile and brutal wave of neo fascism the world has ever seen in the coming years.

You're just saying what everyone thinks in your head :^)

You chain them, they rebel, you die. Problem solved.

List some successful women-only rebel, famalam.

Women's liberation only exists as much as the male population is willing to tolerate the abuse tbh.

It sounds like you're saying that the choice is between women in garbage bags and fascism.

What abuse, the only abuse I perceive is the existence of retards who have to be on top of everything. There is no greater joy than watching the "strong" die, therefeore I alway side with the side that does not have the pretense to dominate others.

Really? Do most men crave da pussy that much? Kinda doubt it fam.

A lot of men can't get a woman because they're simply unattractive in terms of lifestyle (e.g. No career prospects, repulsive body, and can't drive).

Enjoy losing famalam.

The strong always wins.

Those who project strength are never strong, they're cowards. I am exactly where I should be to see things through to the end.

Men aren't going to take up arms to defend Feminism. Especially in the current brutal oppression of the sexual free market.

Hell women won't take up arms to really defend Feminism either.

…wut, so cowards project strength?

That's a strange definition of coward.

targeting only the weakest and using the spectacle to look strong is a coward tactic. strong hunt only worthy prey.

By feminism do you mean any women's rights at all? Because I'm sure many men including myself will take up arms to make sure women aren't forced to be housewives or wear burqas

That's not how it works in nature.

Predators target the weakest in the bunch.

Feminism doesn't need defending. It lives or dies depending on external circumstances.

In terms of Islam, nothing is going to stop that if it gets violent and fundamentalist in Europe. It'll be convert or die. Still, it could go down another route and become liberal as it's exposed to Western European values. Who knows? Women may as well enjoy the benefits while they last.

Feminism will probably stay strong in the Americas. There's no external threats, apart from Evangelical Christianity which is gaining ground in South America. But even then, it can evolve.

...

animal predators hunt to feed, humans are doing such things primarily for entertainment, wouldn't you agree?

with genetic engineering… and other technological innovations… in the meantime women should stop fucking up everything for everyone else tbh

pretty sure we're talking about the civilized man, not polar bears

Very true. In many parts of Europe, socialist organizations formed their own theater groups, marching bands, choirs, ran their own publishing houses, concert venues, pubs, youth movements, and so on. The problem here is twofold: the organizations that backed up these various community organizations collapsed after the advent of neoliberalism, and maybe more importantly, people just don't participate in these kind of activities as much as they used to. It's not just that working class community orgs are withering, is that all communities are eroding. I'm not sure this is wholly down to capital either; in a country like Japan, which is also brutally capitalist, these kinds of community / folk organizations still seem to be thriving.
Liberal individualism might be to blame just as much as capital. We are all willed individuals who cannot even conceive of the value of subjugating ourselves to a communal goal however small, of making sacrifices, of tolerating the intrusion of the other and the community on our own selves. No, now it is the other way around: the community has to accept every individual as-is, no matter how noxious the individual's self-expression might be.

I believe that this is in part why idpol is so prominent; absent an actual organic community, people take up whatever artificial identarian badge they can and then try to conjure up a community around it.

This may sound stupid, but I think professional sports poisoned the working classes as well. Because every working class lad could become a multi millionaire like David Beckham, they didn't want too much socialism because they thought they all had a chance of living the high life. Or if not them, then their kids. Of course, only a tiny percentage actually make it, but professional sports is an opium by relieving the boredom of life and promising immense riches.

You are not far off the money here. This is especially the case in minority communities - the ones I come in to contact with at least. Ask a young man who is none too smart and has objectively nothing going for him what his future plans are, and chances are he will answer something along the lines of hoping to be pro athlete.
OTOH, low-end sports clubs are one of the few remaining popular community organizations, which also ensure that people stay somehwowwhat healthy, and as such are immensely valuable.
And professional large scale spectacular sports have such a long history that they will probably be around as long as humans are (daily reminder to look up the history of chariot racing in the (Eastern) Roman Empire).

Implying capitalism isn't the system that allows SOME of them to be that way. Elliot was just a fucked up dude who didn't know how to get past the sad panda. He was also a petit bourg.

the commodification of sports need to stop.

Because as soon as you escapism and its many representations enter the discussion you are wading knee deep in ideas people have built their identity around.Modern leftists would rather beat around the issue and try to offend as few as possible.

It never works and it turns into a propaganda war the underdog can never win.

bump

Lol no. Just look at the neet thread if it hasn't been deleted already.

What did he mean by this? The hentai site?

pop culture and identity politics have taken the place of religion in the postmodern age. Seriously, bad mouth star wars or any other big pop culture brand for that matter and people will react as if you had insulted their mother. People have lost the ability to truly appreciate art. Instead of art being something that challenges you, it has become something that's supposed to make you feel good and affirm your identity. The brand is therapeutic. Being a Star Wars/Marvel/Harry Potter fan goes way beyond just liking the movies, it is a quasi religious identity of sorts. People might complain about the fandom-religion not being 'inclusive' enough, but the faith itself is never questioned.

Liberal identity politics inhibits criticism of the system as a whole. identity politics exists inside communicative capitalism and it is thus unable of criticising it from the outside. The focus on 'authentic' identity based suffering obscures the everyday misery and alienation that goes beyond identity, as well as the role identity itself plays as a mechanism of control and commodity marketing.

First of, we're going to have to define alienation. From David Graeber's essay Revolution in Reverse:


This explains why people like this
user suddenly feel alienated, because for the first time in modern memory, men are finding themselves in the losing end of a lopsided structure of imagination. Suddenly it's (in certain situations) them who has to spend their time trying to understand how women are thinking, since women sometimes now have more power over them.

Well, why did you choose that particular definition for alienation?

cont.

Graeber traces this back to the emergence of modern social theory:

>The question (about alienation) though is why. Contemporary social theory offers little explanation. Poststructuralism, which emerged in the immediate aftermath of ‘68, was largely born of the rejection of this sort of analysis. It is now simple common sense among social theorists that one cannot define a society as “unnatural” unless one assumes that there is some natural way for society to be, “inhuman” unless there is some authentic human essence, that one cannot say that the self is “fragmented” unless it would be possible to have a unified self, and so on. Since these positions are untenable — since there is no natural condition for society, no authentic human essence, no unitary self — theories of alienation have no basis.

This is where people turn to fascists, because they claim there is a natural condition for society(that has been disturbed by cultural marxism), and that there is a human essence(denied by the same PC genderbending race-blind marxists) that we can return to once the enemy is eliminated. However, we do not have to accept fascist myths about the social organism in order to critique alienation, Graeber continues:


So, poststructural academic leftists are wrong, we need to imagine ourselves living in simple constructs such as "society", and we have to imagine there being a "natural" way for humans to exist in order to go on with our unimaginably complex lives and social relations. From this text, I would argue that the sudden and growing outrage against alienation stems from increasing structural violence enforced through the neoliberal policies that seemingly exist solely to punish and degrade workers.

In order to start talking about alienation, we have to start with our theory. First by completely discarding the modern academic left (that's rightfully hated since they deny even the basis for alienation), and instead start reading stuff like Graeber and the situationist. Only after that can we start building a coherent story about alienation

i'm not fully understanding your point here. You want people like that user to basically just grow the fuck up or what?

nvm you explained it in this post

Because it's the best one I've seen yet, and it explains what it is and how it arises. It's basically Marx's theory of alienation and I don't think there one that's more well accepted

Ah yes, it's always about getting your dick wet with you incels. Any conversation that involves taking away human freedom doesn't belong here

Reminder posts like op are stealth r9k threads and any response that isn't "we'll send your state assigned gf right to your door! Enjoy!" They simply WILL NOT ACCEPT

check out the works of Cornelius Catoriadis, they might interest you.
iep.utm.edu/castoria/
base.mayfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/cornelius-castoriadis-the-imaginary-institution.pdf


imo most people throughout history have found themselves in the losing end of a lopsided structure of imagination. God has been replaced by a barren world consisting only of the atomised self on one side and the monolithic image of unitary 'society' on the other. it is not actual woman who have power over men, but this mass produced virtual image of the 21st century woman that equates liberation with neoliberalism.Think Hillary, the fearless girl wall street statue, wonder woman, all the variations of the WE CAN DO IT poster(originally meant as war propaganda hmm…) Communicative Capitalism imposes an entirely virtual world, an inverted totalitarian structure of imagination that tends to make people claustrophobic. The self is something to be micromanaged, not a subject but an object to be constructed. You are condemned to a social media panoptickon, under constant surveillance from your fellow prisoners. Alt Right meme culture can be understood in part as an attempted breakout, doomed from the start.

somewhat relevant.

theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/07/the-end-of-men/308135/

Because none of you r9k types wants a friend and a life partner. You just want a slave that sucks your cock 10x per day.
There's plenty of fantastic women out there, but you gave in to your retardation and believe you're entitles to an "9" and a "10" whatever the fuck that is…
You're all horrible people, you're boring, lame, generic…i honestly don't see many differences between the r9k type and normies.

The op didn't mention anything that you're complaining about

the absent tfw no gf is a cypher, an easy way out, a totem for the alienation that r9k types experience, sexual dissatisfaction becomes a stand in for existential dissatisfaction in general. Even if they got their gf they would still feel miserable and break up within a week.

That may be true when you think about it. Do you have any shorter introductory texts to Catoriadis like articles, essays etc?

Holla Forums is the normie board, posters here are most likely to have had gfs/bfs, have had sex, have jobs, and be over 20. Basically we are what the rest of channers will become after they get their dicks wet and have to work shitty jobs or starve. Chad is a fictional character, he exists only in the minds of robots whose knowledge of women is lacking.

I don't think that's true. Robot-dom is irreversible and terminal.

t. Worked 45+ hour weeks from 18 to 23 and still haven't had a gf or friends at all. It's a fucking disease I tell you. The best I was able to do is learn social cues and succeed in acting normal, but I was never able to do it naturally.

The rise of the right is inevitable

Your lefty ideologies are just simply flawed
Just accept it

Animals always make play out of their food. I watch my next-door neighbour cat catch field mice among the grass and she always tortures it before eating it.
I had two dogs growing up and they would always catch rabbits. Sure sometimes it was an offering to me or my da but many times for them selves despite being feed every day.
Predators do hunt just for the sport too.

underrated post

What did he mean by this?

Also to add
The reason for all animals play is for survival.
They practice fighting, fleeing, hiding and hunting as they play. Why do you think children play fight? Hide and seek? Bully? Chase eachother about for fun?
Mother nature is smarter than we like to think.
We like to think we as humans are somehow evolved above nature, as if we are smart and nature is stupid, but the fact is that we are only organisms so finely tuned to this earth.

Our environment is what makes us because ultimately we are our environment.
A good saying to describe it is "we came out of this earth, not into it"
Once you really understand that then you will understand just how primitive we are and that we can never escape mother nature.

I don't think so. They're probably just based in some of our personal experiences of feelings of alienation, both because we're close in proximity to /r9k/ culture and because some of us are or used to be on /r9k/. This thread isn't trying to spread /r9k/'s views, though.


Sure we can. We're doing it right now, unless you consider writing to people on the other side of the planet using an electronic device "natural."

Im talking about in behavioural sense.
Sure we could go the trans-human way but to gain any sort of "freedom" from nature you would have to replace the organism as a whole and then that would not be us, we would be something else. Idk how it could work out for them though, i never thought about it.

If we try to play nature and go the genetic engineering way, well that will fail in the end. You would be using flawed human intellect to try and take over the job of nature.
Man can never be his own designer. If we even do manage to then it could not last long, either we fail or nature creeps back in and we do not even realise it for a while.

Behavior has changed significantly over time. Reading is a behavior and it has never been regarded as "natural."

Well, what you're describing is more like a Ship of Theseus problem: how much can you replace and still call the result "human"? The answer is that whatever comes to be called "human" is human to us at that time, even if it wouldn't have been recognized as such in the past (or even if we would've recognized some others as belonging to "human" without it being considered such to people at the time). A person who had replaced all organic parts of himself would be human if we socially regarded him as human (e.g. by recognizing the non-organic individual in law with human rights; I'm not sure if anyone on the left would deny human rights to someone who has become entirely non-organic).

That isn't even touching upon nature being what we have defined for ourselves as "nature" and is a distinctly unnatural product of human understanding as it interacts with reality. Not only that, but what we consider "nature" and "natural," like all definitions, is subject to change over time. Some of what we regard as natural would have been almost unrecognizable as being natural to people living even 200 years ago.

We've already done that for cattle, dogs, etc., as well as many agriculturally important plants. Thus, the flawed human intellect seems to have done so well enough.

Behaviours like reading are not fundamental, they are social\cultural and we all know how flexible we can be in these aspects because we are very social creatures. We still are a product of and ruled by nature no matter what social or cultural practices we have developed.

I am not too good with putting my thoughts into words but what i am trying to say is that because we exist within the cosmos, we are apart of the cosmos, and there for we will always play its rules.
If i had to try and explain what my idea of nature is in this context i would say it is the flow of the universe, or as some essence or pattern behind the cosmos that keeps itself balanced and ordered. We can try and push against the flow of the river but we can never jump out of it so we will always at the end just go with the flow. The current will take us even if we do turn ourselves into robots. When we get to the point of controlling and dictating what we are and how we function by turning ourselves into our own technologies i can imagine the contol could only last for some time. As we phase our own humanity out in favour of efficiency you would find a sort of robo-natural-selection happening. We could just become artificial organisms yet again controlled by its environment.
As for the ship of Theseus, there is no lines between anything ofcourse and it is all subjective but we know damn rightly what we mean by human today. The ship of Theseus was built with wood and replaced with wood, and whilst both ships today we can call the ship of Theseus, if we were to make it an aluminium slowly we couldn't because the qualities would had changed and materials.
Your body is like the ship, it replaces itself every 7-10 odd years or so with a new body, but if it was slowly turned into mechanical it would work, look, act and preform differently there for i reckon we would discriminate between "clanklets and squishies".

Domesticated animals have came about by artificial selection and that is still nature as i described above, same as the plants.
GMO's is your argument i am assuming. This is a whole other debate on its own! There is evidence for and against it, i do not want to get into it because its a technology we still have a lot to learn about.
We have just merely tweaked the organisms as of now but i predict as we do it more heavily we could see more problems and concerns.

Also as for the farming, we work with nature, we shape nature and what happens in return?
Nature shapes us

Like the bees and the flowers
Like the birds and the cattle (birds eating pests from the cows)
Like the trees and the shade loving plants
Like any relationship in nature, you can not get away from the dao

Female issues - popular at the moment, wide support, liberals are allies, its on TV, 51% of the human population directly affected, and they know it.

Alienation of the person from their work - lol virgin losers, unpopular at the moment, linked to Pepe and the alt-right, and to MGTOW/MRAs, mocked on TV, liberals mock it, everyone mocks it, it affects less people and most of the affected won't admit it.

Absolutely love how alienation has become synonymous with tfw no gf on here.

Ebin.

Do you have a dl link? I've been wanting to watch it for ages but never managed to find it.

nvm, turns out it's on tpb

bumpp

saving this thread

gee it's almost like there's a dialectic going on there or something

Identity politics unconsciously upholds the post war white middle class as an universal standard everyone should aspire to. This is their model of 'privilege'. It cannot look beyond petty bourgeois respectability, even as the post war petty bourgeois model is being liquidated by changing economic conditions.

libcom.org/files/Wendy_Brown_States_of_Injury_Power_and_Freedom_in_Late_Modernity__1995.pdf