/lit/ - Literature

>>17095024
"The bad guys"

>>17095024
Sparrows, he's a covert Maoist. Long live Marxism-Leninism-Maoism-Petersonism!

>>17095024
cute doggie

>>17095024
people that don't LARP as christians and aren't brainwashed by capital like him

Even he doesn't know, they're just the scapegoat for all the things he doesn't like

>>17095024
>What does peterson means by postmodernists?
He thinks they're secret marxists who want to destroy the West

Foucalt, Derrida, Lyotard, deconstructionist and especially that group of 70s-ish French intellectuals who secretly loved Marxism. People know exactly who he’s talking about when he says this. I don’t know why they try to do these semantic gotchas.

As far as I can tell, he believes a postmodernist is someone that believes all interpretations are valid

people who disturb the flow of spice

Everyone he doesn't like or who disagrees with him.

>>17095782
>People know exactly who he’s talking about when he says this. I don’t know why they try to do these semantic gotchas.
Because by his own admission he couldn't give a single example when asked to specify who he means when referencing "post-modernists".

>>17095024
I am assuming you are referring to "postmodern neo-marxists", rather than simply "postmodernists", since the latter is obvious. If that is really the case, why don't we see what he has to say about it himself?
https://jordanbpeterson.com/uncategorized/postmodernism-definition-and-critique-with-a-few-comments-on-its-relationship-with-marxism/
>>17096307
What are you referring to? Are you talking about the Zizek debate? Because that's not at all what happened.

>>17095024
according to him postmodernists are Berkeley-tier idealists that argue everything is subjective as a way to justify marxism and destroy western civilization or some other absolute bullshit like that

hey guys, where do i start with Peter Singer, he seems based

>>17095024
Peterson? Nothing.

>>17096330
Practical Ethics. The Life you Can Save

>>17096353
i was joking lol
get fucked you pozzed homo

He means retard leftists

>>17095024
>>17095033
So da Joos?

>>17096321
>Postmodernism leaves its practitioners without an ethic. Action in the world (even perception) is impossible without an ethic, so one has to be at least allowed in through the back door. The fact that such allowance produces a logical contradiction appears to bother the low-rent postmodernists who dominate the social sciences and humanities not at all.
Yeah, what the fuck is this nonsense desu.

>>17096367
yes. his muh postmodernism facade is just more Jewish subversion by refusing to name the Jew and pointing the blame to some french faggots instead

Vaguely leftish professors who argue that everything is a social construct (except liberal-Protestant ethics that inform their worldview, human rights, etc. which are absolutely true)

>>17096387
Ah I see. Maybe when you open up his face a bunch of littler joos come out like spiders.

>>17096385
What do you find challenging about that statement, anon? Without a value system, you would cease to function. In other words, even if you acknowledge the meaninglessness of value systems in intellectual terms, you will still maintain a personal value system so long as you aspire to live on a more than animal level. University campus social scientists and other such dregs pick the ideology of the marginalised as their value system - fighting oppression becomes an absolute value even as intellectually all values are relativised. That this is explicitly "neomarxist", however, is more contested. I think it's equally fair to describe this concern for the marginalised as a primary tenet of liberalism itself.

>>17096359
Lmao. Oh nooooo. He got me. Listen child, one day you will learn that your "redpills" are mostly lies. If not then it's because of your low intelligence. When that happens you will feel shame, but you shouldn't. The smart ones all grow out of their adolescence eventually. The rest lose their hair and turn to ever dumber conspiracies until their anxiety and paranoia destroys their life. You'll see them on pol sometimes in "gangstalking" threads. Scared of a faceless nameless enemy that they created. God speed my child.

>>17096449
>le ebil pol maymay

>>17096411
Kek'd and checked my friend. Stay witty madlad.

>>17096449
If you believe in any Enlightenment-derived ideology, you are so hopelessly brainwashed that there is truly nothing that can save you except great fortune. Whatever can be said about "red pills", at least they lead people onto an intellectual journey completely separated from the mental toxins of the past couple of centuries.

>>17095024
Neomarxists

>>17096449

>>17096484
Is this the cope you have to believe to justify falling for a psyop and joining a hivemind of idiots who "organically" brainwash each other?

Some of us were around when redpills were being created. We all knew they were fake back then though. They laughed at how it would trick some kids and birth the next Hitler. I wonder sometimes where Stormniggers as dumb as they are got the ideas and materials? Hmmm. Makes you wonder.

>>17096449
>le wall of text
Seethe you gremlin.

>>17096504
You the only person bringing up the "pol" meme. Nobody mentioned /pol or any of the stupid memes popular there aside from you.

>>17096504
I am not in a hive mind, my friend, nor do "red pills" necessarily have to lead to a hive mind. The red pill is the substance that, when introduced, wakes you up. Little bits of information that contradict the cultural blackbox of neoliberal hegemony - that is the red pill. What is important is to disconnect from liberal orthodoxy. Once you have done that, you can follow any path you wish.

>>17096510
Yes. I can feel you spineless worms lurking like parasites in my gut. It's an important message and you Zoomers should know that you were manufactured, not enlightened.

>>17096525
Oh, so the redpill and wokeness is the same thing? Ok. Why are they mostly lies or misinterpretations of statistics then? Those bitchez love Neoliberalism as long as it's whits neoliberalism.

>>17096536
What the hell are you talking about? Are you having a stroke?
>Why are they mostly lies or misinterpretations of statistics then?
They're not lol.
>Those bitchez love Neoliberalism as long as it's whits neoliberalism.
Not true, you're talking about MAGAtards. The rabbit hole goes way deeper than you know. How much time do you actually spend familiarising yourself with right wing dissident culture? Check out someone like Keith Woods if you'd like, he'll probably lead you to other nonconformists too. "Racist liberal" is a pejorative among dissidents.

>>17096567
They are. I've been here too long and researched too many of them to believe that even half are true.

Yeah, MAGAS, qoomers, flat-earthers, and poltards are all interchangeable.
This is a pointless conversation though, as I said above, one day your quest for knowledge will lead you to a more fundamental and truthful worldview. No one can truly give it to you, you have to discover it yourself.

>>17096612
>They are. I've been here too long and researched too many of them to believe that even half are true.
Give me some examples then. I probably won't dispute them, I just want some names so I can see what exactly you are referring to.
>Yeah, MAGAS, qoomers, flat-earthers, and poltards are all interchangeable.
That last category spans an infinitely broader spectrum than the first three, all of which fit perfectly into the boomer Republican mould.
>This is a pointless conversation though, as I said above, one day your quest for knowledge will lead you to a more fundamental and truthful worldview. No one can truly give it to you, you have to discover it yourself.
Your empty patronising attitude is totally ineffective as I have long since passed this point.

>>17096635
I'm not patronizing. It's the path of many of us. I don't have a redpill folder anymore, but let's see. The most common one is the one showing media personalitys and owners and claiming the vast majority are Jews. Some on the very infograpb are incorrectly labeled Jewish and beyond that, it's a cherry-picked set of names. Another common one is The Protocols. They're mostly a forgery or A Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu, with Machiavellis ruthless dialogue on power being attributed to the ever amorphous "jew." Which reminds me of the very common Talmud that shows many passages that fit the agenda. Those are completely false. Now, there are ethnocentric attitudes in the Talmud, but those exist within each peoples religion when they had contact with other peoples. They used religion as a unifier, maybe used is a cruel term, but it was both a spirituality and a tool, so obviously it considers its adherents above the neighbors that they were warring with at the time.

I mean, ask me about the most true ones to you and we can discuss them logically.

>>17096449
oh fuck off

>>17096307
JBP lists all of those people that guy above mentioned in his lectures though. He recs Hicks Postmodernism too.

>>17096674
You don't have to be anti-Jewish to reject the status quo. While Jews do play a disproportionate role in media, that's not of core significance IMO, since even if the media was fully controlled by gentiles the end result would remain the same. The Protocols are definitely a forgery but I don't think anyone takes them seriously anymore.
As to red pills, I understand those as more neutral snippets of information that contradict liberal conditioning rather than direct ideological propaganda to be accepted at face value. Take for instance the genocides during the French Revolution or the English Civil War - the Terror, Cromwellian war crimes etc. Liberals accuse fascists of being barbaric thugs, but both in Germany and in Italy the fascist revolutions were far, far more bloodless than the liberal revolutions in France and Britain. This is just one example. Another example would be the existence of programs like COINTELPRO and MKUltra - if the liberal and democratic USA was such a staunch defender of the "free West", then why in God's name did they do this shady shit? Why do the "defenders of freedom" kill and suppress dissidents and why do they experiment on their own innocent citizens? Once you start asking these questions and looking at the evidence, it becomes increasingly difficult to believe in the foundational myths of the current world order.

>>17096712
Well my friend if your attitude was the norm we wouldn't be having this conversation, but I haveva feeling you understand completely the type I'm referring to. I've read Sorel, and Gentile, and as a path to wider Socialism I feel like they make some very good points. That said, I don't support racism at all as it bastardizes human relation and forces generalization onto humanity, which is far too diverse for such totalizing doghma in my eyes. Maybe, it's because my path started with philosophy and only later shifted to the political that I can't find much common ground with your average alt-right adherent online. Maybe, it's my life experience, I've always had a ground-level highly public job. You have to admit though, that many redpills from pol are complete bullshit. If nothing else, we can agree to despise Liberalism. Or are you redpilled on leftists? We actually secretly support the global elite and hate white people.

Speaking of white people. I don't buy "white genocide" I understand the factually relevant statistics and birth rates but recognize them as signs of a decadent society in decline due to Neoliberal pro-corporate and anti-worker policy/economics. I don't think there's a conspiracy. That we see bi-racial advertisements is because people support it and Capitalism consumes all aspects of culture to commodify it. It's rather, a natural result of multiculturalism, we make friends with people of different races and cultures, we love them. Inclusion doesnt equal anti-whiteness. I would call those infographs suggesting otherwise "lies" they don't hold to scrutiny.

Lastly, I think unity across ethnic lines to be necessary if we ever want to truly liberate the people from Liberal hegemony. I understand the difficulty, but alot of that difficulty is manufactured.

>>17096690
>He recs Hicks Postmodernism too.
Not who you're replying to, but I've read Edvard Lorkovic's criticism on this and he absolutely tears it to shreds. It wouldn't surprise me if that was the entirety of Peterson's information on the subject considering how off base Hick's interpretation was.

Don't have a source that's not behind a paywall, apologies:
https://philpapers.org/rec/LORSRH

>>17095024
he's crudely referring to intersectionalists probably. people who center around identity politics and looking through those lenses.

>>17096525
The "redpill" does not encourage intellectual curiousity or lead anyone towards a constructive path. It's just brainwashing people to become anti semitic using cherrypicked information out of context. /pol/ is a far right echo chamber that does not encourage skepticism or questioning but rather hivemind and conformity to the dominant national socialist/white nationalist narrative on the board, regardless if it is rooted in truth or reality. The ends of spreading white nationalism or anti semitism are prioritized over truth or fact.

>>17096897
I have to agree, they're the normies of board culture and have always been about recruiting the youth. Part of me believes that it's the powers that be pulling the strings. If I were optimistic, I would say that in the end the dishonest nature of discourse there woukd drive people away, but where do they have to turn to? The media really is shit and it's hars for a youngster without some basic critical thinking or philosophy under his belt to find the most true or most accurate worldview. He can only research the lies and misinformation through media institutions that have proven untrustworthy and are demonized by the very ideologues that he would need to see unmasked.

>>17096635
>That last category spans an infinitely broader spectrum than the first three, all of which fit perfectly into the boomer Republican mould.

The /pol/tard is really not that varied. It generally refers to a white nationalist or fascist sympathizer which can all be filed under far right.

The boomer Republicans aren't as extreme, but they share some common ground such as conspirational thinking (Qtards/MAGAS: its the deep state pedo cabal vs /pol/: its the Jews), racial prejudice (Qtards/MAGA: Anti illegal immigration, discomfort with rising Hispanic population, civic nationalism vs /pol/: outright ethnic nationalism), and rallying around demagoguery and populist emotional rhetoric.

>>17096919
You're correct about mainstream media. /pol/ is anti establishment, I will give them that, so it can present a compelling alternative even if not rooted in truth necessarily. It is attractive to youth because it presents an alternative to the neoliberal consensus, and simplistic emotional answers to the world's problems.

>>17096275
Thats not wrong

I see that even on /lit/ these political threads are overrun by pseuds and shills

>>17096807
>Well my friend if your attitude was the norm we wouldn't be having this conversation
I understand what you mean, but in the end I have realised that to me, taking a stand for what I love and what is close to my heart is far more important than disassociating myself from the bad folks involved in dissident politics.
With all that said, I don't think you are as well read as you think you are. Most /pol/ shit can at best be an introduction to dissident thought. From that point on, it is up to you to go further and look for new worldviews and information. Say, for example racism - how familiar are you really with racist or racialist thought? On /pol/ you could find vulgar racism, some Nordicism, maybe mention of Madison Grant etc., but there is a lot more to it than that. There are forms of "racism" that completely reject the lumping together of large group - for example, Evola's doctrine of race. Personally, I did not find a satisfactory definition of race until Evola.
As to leftists - I hate them, but I am further to the left of many of them. The Soviets were based and if they weren't philosophically Marxist they'd be way more based, too.
>Speaking of white people. I don't buy "white genocide" I understand the factually relevant statistics and birth rates but recognize them as signs of a decadent society in decline due to Neoliberal pro-corporate and anti-worker policy/economics. I don't think there's a conspiracy.
This is reasonable, but you should acknowledge that the ones pushing mass immigration and multicultural policies, be it in government or megacorps, belong to the same ideological bloc and perhaps even the same class - idk if your leftist tendency is familiar with the term "PMC".
>It's rather, a natural result of multiculturalism, we make friends with people of different races and cultures, we love them.
This does not hold up with reality and you should be honest with yourself. If this was so, then you wouldn't be seeing so much legal red tape and top-down activism in regard to this in the past decades or century.
>Lastly, I think unity across ethnic lines to be necessary if we ever want to truly liberate the people from Liberal hegemony.
This is true, but I can't see it happening from the left, where the opposite tendency seems to prevail (white privilege etc). If anything, I can see racists of all races uniting against liberalism lol.
>>17096897
>/pol/ is a far right echo chamber that does not encourage skepticism or questioning
A "far right echo chamber" by default encourages skepticism and questioning when you're living in the most enormous ideological echo chamber in history, specifically liberal society. In fact, /pol/ is actually too moderate since its radicalism ends at Nazism and its horizons are insufficiently broad to give a holistic education.

>>17096937
>The /pol/tard is really not that varied. It generally refers to a white nationalist or fascist sympathizer which can all be filed under far right.
You have no idea how broad these currents are. If all fascists interacted in a vacuum they would appear as a far less unified bloc - it is the fact that everything else is so foreign and hostile that unites them. If you actually pay close attention to fascism, you will see that there are many, very different tendencies that draw in different types of people. For example, just the difference between Christian and non-Christian fascists alone is huge.
>The boomer Republicans aren't as extreme, but they share some common ground such as conspirational thinking (Qtards/MAGAS)
You really do not know these people well enough. From my perspective, the more rightist people have actually become way too rabidly anti-Republican. There is real contempt brewing there just like socialists feel contempt for the Dems.
>racial prejudice
Lurk around their spaces a bit, see for yourself how much they shit on MAGAtards for their boundless love of minorities and you will notice the difference. Republican nationalism is race-blind and only implicitly white, to the extent that whites give a shit about America. It is a very different thing from white nationalism.
>rallying around demagoguery and populist emotional rhetoric.
This is such a broad and generic statement that it can be applied to literally anyone, including countless of far left groups.

>>17097006
>This does not hold up with reality and you should be honest with yourself. If this was so, then you wouldn't be seeing so much legal red tape and top-down activism in regard to this in the past decades or century.

It's a polarizing issue. Some get along with other races naturally or have affinity for them regardless of legality (abolitionists or civil rights activists sympathized with other races despite the culture/state being against it at the time, showing legality or state hegemony did not matter for their worldview), while some do have biases that the legal policy/political correctness/activism keeps in check. Racism and ethnocentrism are not a universal trait in my view though. Racism to me seems like something bred out of fear and ignorance that dissipates with exposure to other cultures or people of other races . You have to deal with them directly a human being rather than an vague abstraction or broad archetype and I think in most this causes feelings of otherness and racism to decline, although in some the differences may cause tension to increase, but not in the majority of the population.

I'm a different responder btw

>>17097061
>Some get along with other races naturally or have affinity for them regardless of legality
This is true, but "some" is a key word.
>Racism and ethnocentrism are not a universal trait in my view though.
This is also true, but today this is by no means something that can be observed "naturally", since modern society breaks up every traditional form of social bonds and organisation. If you look back in history, you will notice that every example of ancient "multiculturalism" was actually a form of segregation.
> Racism to me seems like something bred out of fear and ignorance that dissipates with exposure to other cultures or people of other races
This appears to me completely unjustified. Perhaps it applies to vulgar racism, but there is not necessarily any connection between exposure to other cultures and the abandonment of racism. For example, ever since my early childhood I have always been a xenophile and I love reading about foreign cultures, but that is one of the reason I came to support ethnonationalism rather than oppose it. Most leftists would find this incomprehensible.
>You have to deal with them directly a human being rather than an vague abstraction or broad archetype and I think in most this causes feelings of otherness and racism to decline, although in some the differences may cause tension to increase, but not in the majority of the population.
Both perspectives are valid. Just because you can relate to someone on a human level does not somehow invalidate group patterns.
To sum up, my general point was that with the herculean efforts exerted to "smash racism" and promote "diversity, tolerance and inclusion" over the past century makes it quite obvious that none of this is the natural state of things. This will only become more clear with the progression of demographic decline and the increasingly radical methods of repression that liberal authorities will unleash in order to keep the natural reactions of their native electorate in check.
>I'm a different responder btw
I would have preferred if you had put that at the top, anon, but that's okay too.

>>17097006
Well, I don't fault you for having convictions, and I don't particularly care that you associate with morons. You've captured my interest with your opinions, and that's all that really matters right now.
I'm fairly well read. You shouldn't worry. Pol shit is a poor introduction to dissident thought IMO because it's not based on a truthful or logical foundation, it's a loose set of sometimes plausible unexamined and unproveable claims woven together to create a narrative that fits a specific mostly white supremacist fascist agenda. It's this way by design. The dissidents therein don't care about truth or fact, only that their conspiracy sounds plausible and alligns with the goal. I could probably read more about race, and I've been curious about Evolas spiritualism for a while. Overall though, I have bast experience in living among and working with working class blacks and Mexicans. I can't hate them, they're me in a sense. The large majority are very good people with good values.
I don't believe you do hate leftists though, you even take pride in being further left than them. I think you hate the perception of leftists presented by corporate media and interpreted by your echo-chamber. If you engaged with even mild leftist media, you wouldn't see anything but a very similar dissidents that you've come to enjoy, except this skepticism is logical and seeks the closes possible rational truth. Now, of course they don't always get things right. Leftism though is critique, it is dissdence. They were censored, silenced, killed, and their movements absorbed long before the modern alternative righy, who unironically believe themselves to be proven by their ostracism, much as the left always have. I think radlibs and leftists are very different. There is no corporate allegiance on the left. They don't type missives from their iphones in Starbucks. You got memed into believing that.
[ ]

>>17097006
>>17097254
2
I acknowledge the Liberals and their immigration for profit as well as the megacorps that allow such and use it to depress wages. This isn't done to harm whites, it's done for profit, as Capitalism and its global elite is the problem, not some concerted conspiracy. It does hold to reality. America is the most powerful and the most multicultural nation in all of history. Look at opinion polls. Americans support theid countrymen, even those who sre minorities. Remember also that the only real immigration policy that sought to end wage disparities and truly establish better immigration was that of the center-left in Bernie Sanders. The Liberals feared the man, he was far more populist than Trump. Top-down activism is a laughable term. Neoliberalism absorbs popular culture. They create an emotional connection and sell their products to liberals who ignore their evils in the third world if only they fly a rainbow flag. This isn't surprising, they throw bones to those who threaten them, and currently only the Liberals and Leffists pose any threat to their hegemony, so they will obviously adopt a caring identity to appease them. The right in this country will consume regardless. They don't care about the sources of the product, the labor used fo make it, or the companies identity. They only care about convenience. Petty western convenience paid for with the blood of third world children. The alt-right has been extremely weak in regards to actually rejecting Capitalism and is still fledgling.

This last point of yours is purely doghma. It's the left that's taken to the streets with people of color. It's leftists that have fought and won higher wages and protections for the working class. You've been memed into believeing a liberal narrative about leftism. I don't believe your as well read as you seem to think or else you would betted understand the history of this nation and have accessed works highlighting how you've been mistaken by Liberal Capitalist tricks. The Culture Industry by Adorno comes to mind. Regardless, I don't believe your side is as enlightened as you seem to think, and I believe your characterization of the left to be actually a characterization of the liberal.

Just as the alt-right has grown. So too has the real left. Espescially since Trump. In the end the most accurate and helpful worldview that makes sense to the most people will prevail. The one that provides the greatest good to the greatest number and can prove itself with factual evidence and rational reasoning. Who do you think that will be?

>>17095024
postmodernists are those who deconstructed the concept of washing your penis and spread false dick cheese hoarder belief systems.

>>17097254
I think you are being a bit unfair to /pol/ - at least years ago it was a good intro, imo. Also, while most people there already have their mind made up, I think many still look for the truth, perhaps even the majority. It's just that they have certain preconceived ideas about what the truth can and can not look like - just like everyone else.
>I can't hate them, they're me in a sense.
It is difficult to hate large groups of people. I only hate ideologues, I don't hate any group of people either. An intelligent nationalism does not require hatred.
>I don't believe you do hate leftists though, you even take pride in being further left than them.
I hate them because of what they do, who they are and their positions. I also don't necessarily hate them for right wing reasons only - for example, I hate DSA leftists for the same reason the Bolsheviks hated social democrats in the 30s.
>I think you hate the perception of leftists presented by corporate media and interpreted by your echo-chamber.
I am not in just one echo chamber - I've visited all sorts of echo chambers of different groups - fascists, communists, leftists, feminists, etc. The only ones I found truly intolerable are anarchists, of whom I saw very little before I concluded that they were just awful, awful people with awful ideas.
>They were censored, silenced, killed, and their movements absorbed
That's the thing, it's hard to even find proper leftists to talk to. Occasionally I can find some Maoists or tankies, but our common ground is purely economic and as soon as they hear about my non-Marxist point of departure they want to kill me lol.
>I think radlibs and leftists are very different.
Also true, but radlibs are basically in charge of the left today. Old left types have failed to take the lead even once.
>This isn't done to harm whites, it's done for profit, as Capitalism and its global elite is the problem, not some concerted conspiracy.
You are correct that it is done for profit, but the practical side of that is what you are currently referring to as a "conspiracy".
>truly establish better immigration was that of the center-left in Bernie Sanders
He cucked out on that and embraced the self-acknowledged "Koch policy" of open borders in the end.
>The Liberals feared the man, he was far more populist than Trump.
He was fake too IMO, just fleeced his supporters and worked with the establishment as soon as he could. He too is a millionaire in spirit and demagogue in action.
>Top-down activism is a laughable term.
All of the multicultural propaganda is just that, though. Public-facing offices of government spend maybe 30%-40% of their resources on "diversity" or the promotion of it.
>The alt-right has been extremely weak in regards to actually rejecting Capitalism and is still fledgling.
Depends on what you mean by "alt-right". If you are referring to Bannonite neocon bullshit, sure, but there are other types of more serious people.

>>17097254
>>17097272
>This last point of yours is purely doghma. It's the left that's taken to the streets with people of color.
Sure, but you'll lose white people. The whole "white privilege" shit is extremely polarising. The left does not want to unite the different groups, it wants to "liberate" minorities and what that means is dynamically redefined (for example from legal discrimination to "prejudice+power", so now we have legal discrimination against whites which is somehow "anti-racist").
>It's leftists that have fought and won higher wages and protections for the working class.
Not for a long time now.
>You've been memed into believeing a liberal narrative about leftism.
No, I think it's possible to find good Marxist groups in various areas of the West up until maybe the 60s, perhaps even a bit after that, but especially in the past thirty years, the left has accomplished nothing except making the world more alien to the normie whiteoid.
>Regardless, I don't believe your side is as enlightened as you seem to think, and I believe your characterization of the left to be actually a characterization of the liberal.
I acknowledge the differences between radlibs/new left/neoliberals and traditional left types, but the traditional leftists are basically extinct and marginalised. You are correct that the right isn't necessarily enlightened today, but there is yet room for growth, I hope.
>Just as the alt-right has grown. So too has the real left. Espescially since Trump.
Can you name any interesting personalities or groups you have in mind?
>The one that provides the greatest good to the greatest number and can prove itself with factual evidence and rational reasoning.
I think you are wrong here, people don't care for rational reasoning or evidence. Some people do, but not people in general.
>Who do you think that will be?
Hard to say, but I think whoever has the most power will win. This will probably be the radlibs in the USA and maybe the right in some areas of Europe.

>>17097350
I'm getting tired, so I'm gonna make this one much shorter and be done. I've enjoyed it though.

Eh, some Anarchists aren't bad at all. I think they're naive in their pacifism. Anarcho-Syndicalism is pretty similar to Italys fascism in many ways.

Bernie didn't fleece or fool anyone. You can watch his filibusters from 40 years ago and he was shouting debridement at the elite and working hard for better working class conditions. That he became successful from a book shouldn't erase his history. If he was trying to fool people he played a might consistent long con. It's hard to find genuine leftsits. Maybe try Libgen forums though. Or as lame as it is, even some Facebook groups have legitimate high level discussion. Many of course are shit, and the Zucc will eventually delete the good ones, already been happening.

The conspiracy isn't that white people are being fucked by corporations. The conspiracy is that they're being wittingly replaced and that a silent plan for genocide is under way.

You say they'll lose white people, but the largest polls showed 75% white support for BLM among Liberals and 40% for conservatives. This was prior to the media focusing on the small percentage of violent protests. The powers that be are so sophisticated, it's hard to tell whether I believe the movement was purposefully lead to violencd and then that violence was focused on, or if it was organic. Hard to say.
I personally believe the left should focus on class, but dealing with race first and ensuring equal treatment by the government may lead to the black community being more willing to focus on class. It is a tough issue though.
You say not for a long time, that isn't true though, they foughy for wages for Amazon and Mcdonalds and won fairly recently and they're consistently at the front of civil rights issues.

As for personalities, I like many, Chris Hedges for one, some of the smaller youtube guys similar to your Keith Woods are good too. Like Hakim for instance, they seem very similar in approach.

Cheers man. Im sleep.

>>17097362
To add to personalities, maybe wath Hakim take down Vaush lmao. It's pretty devastating

>>17096321
>What are you referring to? Are you talking about the Zizek debate? Because that's not at all what happened.
he probably didn't watch it, just another chan parrot