Political Theory: Aliens, Antisemitism, and Academia

...

iamkikey lets this kike post but bans book threads

coup when?

I don't get it. Is he saying leftism is based off right thought and theory? Maybe it's because I'm not versed in this but can someone explain why? Is it just because leftists argue against the enlightenment? I feel likes that's poor comparison if so

Also I've never seen Holla Forums meme about starting with the greeks. That's a /lit/ meme and /lit/ is a communist board.

It's Jacobin magazine. It's trash. Even Holla Forums knows it's trash.

The modern or should we say post-modern Left fell in love with unreason. Unreason which was first and foremost championed by the Right. The critique of modernity, the Enlightenment always lends itself better to the Right than the Left. For example read this from Baudrillard: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Baudrillard#The_end_of_history_and_meaning
Although it reads like a typical post-modern critique of culture, society etc from our point of view it's really just a full BTFOing of progressivsm. This is what the author means by taking the post-modern Lefts ideas to their logical conclusion. Foucault basically wrote the Bible on sexuality/homosexuality but didn't go far enough (Others have completed his thoughts by commenting on how modern society basically breeds gays). Post-modernism is literally our (the Rights) intellectual tradition.

Every Holla Forums book compilation is literally a Greek gay orgy. Busts and statues of Greeks everywhere. I saw a thread where some guy wanted to read Aristotle to learn how to argue against fat positive feminists.

I disagree, you give way to much credit to the so-called "renaissance". It was more a fabrication than anything else (in the academic, not in some conspirational sense), there was no great "awakening of reason" or somesuch, just a continuation of a series of 12-15th century development dressed in Roman garb.

It would do you a world of good to actually​ read the post you're responding to.

Of course. Greek and Roman architecture and beauty values are highly appraised here. I don't see people jerking off Aristotle though.
Evola seems to be the most well known and liked philosopher here. I'm not saying Greeks aren't in the "books you should read" threads (they have to be since like it or not they are a huge part of the western classical canon) just that "start with the greeks" is a /lit/ meme and I don't see it pushed often here.
Then again I don't really go into the book threads much so

You know friend being a smug ass does not win people over on the internet when it's not even amusing and you do nothing to refute the point being made

I'm not being smug. You literally didn't read the post, as you were claiming I said things I never said. I'm not going to retype what's already there for you to read, especially when on a phone.

I haven't read any replies in this thread, but I saw the words aliens and politics in the same sentence. There is only one way to deal with aliens and you all know it. Purge the xenos.

Friend I'm not that guy I just read his post and I don't see your reasoning for being a little bitch. He just said that the Renaissance is an academic meme.

OP, if you used your turbo autism for something productive, a secure future for our children would be certain. Instead, you're fixated on the superfluous. Be practical. Affect the world at arm's reach. Don't get lost in nebulous vocabulary.

It's simple. We are the end of postmodernism. We are postmodernism when it eats itself. It is easy to disregard deconstruction as merely being disingenuous faggotry hidden behind pretty words when you deconstruct deconstruction itself.

Furthermore post-modernism itself requires ironically the concept of objective reality or god of some kind to make any sense because without a foundation the house is weak and frail. They treat postmodernism as they do all philosophies: as a tool to get them to point B with not enough regard for what the philosophy can really do.

Wait, you are trying to tell me the left is rational and reasonal? Not in the last 100 years. Also NatSoc is not right-wing, but a hybrid of left and right. We just want to go to space and colonize other planets, you losers can stay here and do whatever you want then. But you wont, you will come behind us once we built something and want our stuff, like the shitskins in Europe.

...

Why?

He is a follower, since he took info from our rebellion, and applied it to get a name for himself?

Yeah, don't read any of those idiots. The problem isn't "reason." The problem is that there is nothing reasonable about enlightenment dogma. Doesn't mean you need to go full retard and waste time reading literal schizophrenic nonsense from the likes of Foucault.

This guy gets it. If you must read the french then of course read Voltaire, who was a very very bad goy. If you wish to understand the desires of the enemy then de Sade lays them out plainly and in at times nauseatingly explicit terms.
Hobbes and Burke are both useful, and of course Heidegger.

He his correct though, many things attributed to "Renaissance" era scholars or attributed by them to ancient sources turned out to be work cribbed from late middle ages Europeans. Hence why during the self-named Enlightenment there was a bunch of bullshit assertions about saracens keeping greek works alive based on those prior attributions, in reality the mudslimes preserved essentially nothing and it was Europeans who did essentially all of it. But foriegn things had the appearance of being more credibly tied to the ancient world so authors of the time would intentionally attributed works to saracens and through them to the Romans or Greeks.

There was no period call the "Renaissance" rather a movement confined almost entirely to Northern Italy which was highly classically minded, most of the development of the scientific method and the arts which would later become the sciences had nothing to do with it.

I'd say we are rebelling against the fertilization of "Reason" which is merely the the internal consistence of a series of assumptions. Fedora tippers today do the same thing with magical SCIENCE despite having no ability to apply the scientific method themselves and create predictive models.

Topkek

kys

...

Reading Foucault and taking him seriously is worse than being illiterate.

So they've finally started to understand that they're not fighting with the right wing, they're fighting with human nature itself.

Even if they managed to kill every last one of us and burn every single one of our books, they'd still lose in the end because they are human and the Enlightenment and so-called "humanism" are against human nature.

How can you fight an enemy that you don't even know? Knowledge is power and there's nothing wrong with understanding the argument of your enemy, in fact it is vitally important to deconstructing the fallacies of their argument. Anyone who shills against gaining more knowledge has an ulterior agenda or is just plain stupid. I doubt Mussolini and Hitler would have been as successful as they were against the left had they not read Marx.

God that's fucking sad. Your tiny mind couldnt survive university let me tell you right now. Youre going to be somebodys tool your entire life i suspect.

Try not to be so gullible. Expand your vocabulary a bit so you dont get all doe eyed next time you (accidentally, obviously) encounter somebody who is posturing as literate, again I point to the absolutely brain-smashing fact that you thought it insightful to post a jacobin link, unbroken mind you, and then tell your superiors (everyone from bricklayers and locusts to my own sweet self) to read beaudrillard, as if you had a thimbleful of clue what the fuck you were talking about. You skimmed a jacobin article and ran your mouth about how we all need to hit the ole clumsily disguised marxism/sexual dysfunction made academia French Critical theorists.

Jeeeeeezus

In a very foucault appropriate fashion i would literally put you in prison for a month for making this post

OP the eternal fag didn't just say we should read foucalt and zizek, he said we should read them and not the classical greeks, romans and "lame conservatives" whatever that means since no user here would be reading cuckservative literature. OP honestly smells of Holla Forums making a sad attempt at trying to shift the overton window here by persuading Holla Forumsacks to read their books. Which is dumb as fuck but if it's Holla Forums that'd be par for the course.

Currently reading Aristotle's works right now. From what I've gathered, they still ring with truth.

Anyone got modern redpilled writers/philosophers?

bump

Who is the black guy that writes for Townhall and appears in a video where he "BTFOs the gender pay gap"? I forgot his name but that is the type of lame conservative people read on this board. Literal house nigger Republicans.

warriors don't read books

Yes. Read it.

The whole point is that we don't need to know everything about the enemy, in order to shoot back. We just need to fire at them with what we got, rather than waste time figuring out the optimal weapon.

It's only when you actually fire back, that you notice what work and not, so your weapons and strategy do get better as you spend time in the trenches.

any nation that separates its warriors from its scholars will have its thinking done by cowards and it fighting done by fools.

you better be memeing lad, cuz i doubt your a 300 confirmed kill warrior

Gayest rationalizing I have ever seen. Stay black.

NRx is wholly empty academic masturbatory nonsense.

It's just another form of post modern mumbo-jumbo bullshit. If anything it dilutes the right if we appropriate it.

I hate all Dark Enlightenment faggotry and am glad I don't hear about it here too often. It's almost like in the same venn diagram of libertarian or ancap style autism and terminal irrelevance.

Who the fuck is talking about NRX?

Are you talking about Thomas Sowell? I haven't seen anyone recommend that chimp-in-a-suit here since at least a year ago. I haven't seen his webms posted in the past six months. As far as I'm concerned any user unironically suggesting anybody read his books was trs or an equally cucked faggot who got lost on his way to the nearest "implicit" mens bathroom stall.

I enjoy David Hume, Liebnitz, and Descartes.

The "book threads" were being used to push poison pills shilling TRS/Renegade kosher authors like V.K.Clark.
They were unmasked.

I think so. His argument seems to be that the Right looks to 'nature' or 'God' as inspiration behind their ideas. So; the strong should rule the weak, the man has dominion over his wife, kill your enemies to survive, and that man's place is as a hunter who must earn his life through toil or killing.

The Left supposedly came from 'rationality' (which in this case means exactly nothing) in that they believe all things should be equal; universalism, egalitarianism, tolerance, diversity, etc.

He is saying that the Left is trying to use the Right's 'religious' or 'natural hierarchical' position to prove their 'rational conclusions'. So in other words they are saying that all humanity is equal; that everyone would be the exact same were it not for these dastardly things that are the fault of European men. They are trying to say that nature proves that their way is right; that God is on their side.

They are wrong of course, and that's why his conclusion is that the 'alt-right' will win. Traditional beliefs of course being based upon observed reality. Jews are parasites. Women are child-bearers. Men are warriors or toilers. Only a King can truly lead a people without causing massive rifts in society. …And so on.

Where is the onion address equivalent for

8ch.net/pdfs/index.html

- searched for it in the index and it says search temporarily disabled.

Also that https address location rejects DjVu format uploads. wtf!

From Machiavelli to Rousseau you have Classical resurgence to the Romantic (((modernist))); the cake is a lie
Pre-Descartes: No. Aristocracy > nobility (subordinate to Kings). Classical learning wasn't undertaken to gain appreciation of what already was the case, uplifted by its own bootstraps.
For Martin Luther, and a return of the medieval without the constraints of an existence grounded in the hierarchical structure of the church/feudal governance in Modernism.

Only the ones not utterly, irredeemably untenable. Zizek made a career from taking the piss out of the New Left on the same grounds. Right conclusions, tortuously faulty methods, as translated into their idiom. Bed of Procrustes, and Leftism: From de Sade and Marx, to Hitler and Marcuse from Erik Ritter von Kuehnelt-Leddihn set this thesis out in detail in the Old American Right days already; always the eternal return, the same old struggles on our side.

Their influences from the Reactionary literary movements from the 3rd Republic to the Blue Hussards from the interwar period through WWII lay this to bare. In Nietzche's terms, they run the marathon, only to lay down in sight of the end line: decadence embodied.

The Left's autism in morals is intended here.

No, contrary (see: )
: Alinsky against us doesn't win converts, but the opposite. Maybe they want to induce counter reaction as fait accomplis for their own designs. When we do the same to them, we neutralize or retake their most effective agents (because they're parasitic of reactionary intellectual trends); when they are made to "play by their own playbook" – they become us, or devour their own in purity spiraling, which has brought us to Loretta Lynch's 'blood in the streets' calling back to the BLM riots, and most recent Based StickMan and Berkely incidents. Foucault is a literal insufferable faggot, but he Is against what passes for the liberal-progressive rubberstamp railroading everyone, at the least.

^

Leftists choose between either Rousseau/Kant/Habermas, or DeSade/Hegel&Marx/Heidegger; the former was asendant in Neoliberalism/Globalism/Apostate-Trotskyism, and the latter in the historically communist states. Most here would find an ethnically conscious National Bolshevism more sanitary than the open borders circus pushed on us now – and the point is it would be to the Zizeks of the world as well, even if they can't admit it explicitly. Why? To quote the domestic terrorist AntiFa, "By Any Means Necessary." The absence of pet minorities – or their extirpation by Stalin, Mao doesn't prevent them from advocating their legacies against the contemporary Left in edging Olympics. There is something to work with to drive a wedge between the 'authentic' and 'inauthentic' Left – John Maus not disavowing Million Dollar Extreme stands out in particular on this very point.

Jorjani would be worth reading in the NYT, but you don't know he's Editor-in-Chief at Arktos; is Persian with a historical linguist's grasp of the language and its Indo-Aryan relations to other tongues in the tree, among other relevant media contributions in our political spectrum. The Left bifurcates into anarchism (Jacobins, the Chomskys) or those that embrace hierarchy to bulwark against Capitalism. (((tl;dr))): >>9492150

double implicit nigger

Don't let edgelord bandwaggoners ruin your intellectual development and journey through the Western Cannon.

Most people do not have the discernment to tell the difference between a real democracy, and a theatrical imitation. Guess which one we have.