ITT: Times you were memed on by /lit/

[Anonymous No.12256275]

>interested in contemporary studies of capitalism
>anons on /lit/ highly recommend Mark Fisher's "Capitalist Realism," decide to buy it
>read the first sentence: "In one of the key scenes in Alfornso Cuaron's 2006 film Children of Men, CXlive Owne's character, Theo, visits a friend at Battersea Power Station, which is now some combination of government building and private collection."
>immediately feel a sense of anger at being memed into reading an extended media studies essay and regret at the $12 I wasted buying this 80-page "book"

Am I the only one who feels this way? Any anons have other stories of being memed into buying a shitty book? And yes, I did end up reading the whole thing, and no, it didn't get better.

[Anonymous No.12256284]

>>12256275
how can this standard droll media studies study be the same school as the ultra redpilled cyberpunk nick land fascism

[Anonymous No.12256293]

If you buy a Zero Books release at this point you only have yourself to blame.

[Anonymous No.12256299]

Similar feeling here, bought the book as I was recommended by a friend. I had to abandon it I found the book so bad.

Fisher did awesome work on Burial's music tho.

[Anonymous No.12256300]

>>12256293
I know, and I'm angry at myself too. I've had great and worthwhile recommendations on literature from /lit/ in the past though, so this was a surprise. At least now I know that "Zero Books" lives up to its name.

[Anonymous No.12256304]

>>12256300
Are you a retarded kid?

[Anonymous No.12256312]

>>12256304
Probably a little, I did buy Capitalist Realism after all.

[Anonymous No.12256336]

>>12256312
Capital is still the best extensive study of it, little has change in 150 years especially in 3rd world. I also found Imran Hosein's lectures interesting, but I haven't read anything by him.

[Anonymous No.12256341]

>>12256284
because some hack publication said so

[Anonymous No.12256350]

>>12256336
What do you think of David Harvey's work? He seems to do a good job of modernizing the language and concepts in Marx's Capital and applying it to contemporary capitalism.

[Anonymous No.12256363]

>>12256312
Don't listen to this pleb.>>12256336
Read literally any economics textbook after 2016 or get Basic Economics by Sowell.

[Anonymous No.12256381]

>>12256350
I have only read the original non-abridged Capital but seeing as there's still no spiritual scientific successor to the original Marx writings that disseminate the modern capitalism really says a lot.

[Anonymous No.12256396]

>>12256381
Yeah, it says commies are literally too retarded to create anything new so they cling dogmatically to the ancient teachings of a dead "prophet." Sound familiar?

[Anonymous No.12256404]

>>12256293
i mean it's there in the name

[Anonymous No.12256411]

>>12256396
I know, it's like capitalism and corruption won :^)
The guy that owns a patch of land where Marx's grave is located charges entry so you can visit the tombstone.

[Anonymous No.12256461]

>>12256275
why do you keep reposting this? you've already posted this thread before more than once and you also come into unrelated threads to post the same thing again. i know it's you because every time you write the same exact complaint: somebody recommended it, it was 80 pages, there were references to movies in it, you were mad about it. is this the only book you've read this year or something?

[Anonymous No.12256472]

>>12256381
uhm Marx wasn't scientific to begin with, sweaty

[Anonymous No.12256476]

>>12256461
It's the only book that made me mad enough to keep posting about negatively, yes. I've read many books that I enjoyed and therefore you wouldn't know it's me posting about them. This book needs to be criticized, I'm doing a public service by exposing what a hack job it is. I've noticed that since I started attacking the book most of the shills have left the board. They all praised it before, now only you are left. Fisher sucks and so does Zero Books. Is your job to look for me in every thread and respond? I hope they aren't paying you very much.

[Anonymous No.12256484]

>>12256275
>buying books
this was your first mistake

[Anonymous No.12256485]

>>12256476
why bully the dead

[Anonymous No.12256492]

>people actually read Fisher and realize he is a joke
>Angela Nagle turns neoreactionary
is it over for Zero Books?

[Anonymous No.12256495]

>>12256485
What a non-argument, I'm criticizing the man's work not the man's life (of which I know very little). All I have to judge him on is his published work, which is garbage. Maybe it's fine in a media studies context, but that's not what I'm looking for and that is NOT how it was presented by the shills on this board.

[Anonymous No.12256499]

>>12256492
>Angela Nagle turns neoreactionary
I keep seeing this on the board without context. Any actual proof?

[Anonymous No.12256500]

>>12256472
Yes he was.

[Anonymous No.12256519]

>>12256499
she literally wrote her book by copy-pasting from neoreactionary online publications, and she is against open borders

she's not really NRx, but she seems kind of an opportunist and could go there or radical centrist at some point if the left bullies her too much and can't have a career there anymore

[Anonymous No.12256525]

>>12256476
>muh media
you are a brainlet, Fisher was brilliant

[Anonymous No.12256537]

>>12256525
>Fisher was brilliant
Post some examples of said brilliance, please. You shills never deliver on this.

[Anonymous No.12256551]

>>12256476
i don't care about the book, i looked at it once and it seemed like watered-down zizek so i didn't bother. i have no idea what the book says or why you disagree with it because you've never posted anything substantial about it beyond the observation that it mentions movies, which you somehow consider an unforgivable error, like "i though it would be insightful, but then i noticed it mentions movies", which is just a non-sequitur.

actual criticism would take place if you wrote what points he's making with these movie analogies and why he's wrong. the fact that you can write copiously about your weird 4chan crusade but not about the book the crusade is against just makes you look like an illiterate autist with an incoherent grudge against a dead guy.

[Anonymous No.12256556]

>>12256350
HAHAHAHAHA OH FUCK TELL ME ABOUT THE FALLING RATE OF PROFIT AGAIN DAVE XXXXXXDDDDD OH SHIT WHAT ARE YOU DOING WWWWWWW FINANCIALIZATION FFFFFFF LMAO WHAT DID YOU DEFINE CAPITAL AS :DDDDD BENIS ;D FICTICIOUS CAPITAL FUUUUUCK CONGRATURATION NO REAL ESTATE CAPITAL LELELELELELELEL ESTEBAN EZEQUIEL MAITO SMHTBHSMHTBH SICK GRAPH MIND IF I POST IT ON /r/8 CHIN DOT NET but seriously he's pretty shit

[Anonymous No.12256924]

>>12256551
Last time I tried to respond crashed my computer (thanks Fisher!), so this reply isn't going to be as good.

>"i though it would be insightful, but then i noticed it mentions movies", which is just a non-sequitur.

It's not since they are central to his arguments. He uses Wall-E and Heat, among others, to prove points about the nature of neoliberal capitalism as it exists in society. The problem is he is basically just using screenwriter's fictional material to make an argument about real world conditions. It's intellectually lazy and inane. He relies heavily on block quotes by better writers to make his points for him and doesn't seem to inject much of his own material aside from the media analysis mentioned and excessively detailing the bureaucratic systems he has to personally deal with in his own specific teaching position at a university system in the UK.

His "market Stalinism" material was interesting but not sure how groundbreaking it is to show that neoliberal capitalist systems have similar levels of bureaucracy as the old state socialist systems did. Maybe this is a profound revelation for British readers but it falls rather flat for me. Perhaps because I'm reading this as an American, but his perspective and analysis seemed excessively British and provincial, dealing with issues in ways that are unique to that country rather than applicable to a global context. Which goes alongside another problem: his lack of analysis of concrete events in economic and political fields. He spends so much time analyzing fiction that he ends up being extremely shallow in his coverage of real-world events and consequences that should be elaborated on. Not to mention that he leaves his central question "Is there no alternative," unanswered besides some generic platitudes. His emphasis on the bureaucratic nature of neoliberalism vs state socialism and therefore we need to replace it with something else isn't a very inspiring call to arms. Maybe I misread his main points but I doubt it.

I wanted to like the book but was left extremely disappointed by his over-reliance on pop culture to make his points. This, along with pic related is why I have no interest in delving further into his body of work and instead will look elsewhere for commentary on the nature of "late" capitalism, like Crary. Fisher feels to me like the literary equivalent of Rob Ager. That's not a compliment.

Again, if you like media studies (which I am clearly not a fan of) maybe he's a great thinker, but that is not what I'm interested in and that is NOT how the book was portrayed on this board. Also, since you didn't even read the book, why do you care so much? I'm acting in good faith, if you haven't even read the work how are you supposed to respond in the same manner? Why insist on hounding me to defend someone who you don't even feel is worth the time to read?

[Anonymous No.12256935]

>>12256519
Reminder that being against emigrants and immigrants wage cutting natives is traditionally a marxist stance

[Anonymous No.12256940]

>>12256411
What is maintenance costs?

[Anonymous No.12256945]

>>12256411
You mean "reality"?
>>12256935
Reminder that you always lie
(Also marxism can't be against wage cutting since it is against wages so wtf are you even on about)

[Anonymous No.12256947]

>>12256935
In the 1970s Cesar Chavez literally sent picket lines to the US-Mexican border and got in fist fights with illegals, since he felt they acted as "scabs" and undermined his efforts to unionize migrant farm workers. The bizarre and anti-labor shift to open borders that organized labor's leaders took in the 1990s is the most insane policy change of the twentieth century. More bizarre even than the Sierra Club's decision to support more immigration. It's like wealthy donors told them to shut up and the leadership was happy to take the money and oblige.

[Anonymous No.12256989]

>>12256275
The biggest meme /lit/ ever peddled was telling me Atlas Shrugged was shit.

[Anonymous No.12257052]

>>12256275
The socialism and whinging about his cushy job as a professor are probably the worst parts of the book

The media studies is the most interesting part. He was a good film and music critic. The thing with leftists is that they're good at highlighting previously unidentified patterns and criticizing them, but terrible when it comes to solutions.

[Anonymous No.12257090]

>>12256476
How do we know that you aren't a meta-shill? Mere exposure is enough to advertise a book anyway.

[Anonymous No.12257182]

>>12256935
the left has no principles, the left just has strategies to tear down and redistribute power, whether the left is for or against migrants depends on the context, and at this point the left believes that they can manipulate poor browns, but not poor whites, so it's a good strategy to import them from that point of view

i believe browns are people too, and the left will fail to manipulate and socially engineer them on the long term, so this is a retarded strategy, but the left strategy has never been a long term one

[Anonymous No.12257270]

>>12257052
Because all their solutions so far just seem to be extreme projects of social engineering. Humans are fucking stubborn, its in our *gasp* nature almost

[Anonymous No.12257275]

>>12256275
>ITT: Times you were memed
https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=0h0m0s&v=gVEdQJ7qtJw

[Anonymous No.12257302]

>>12256989
Because it's shit

[Anonymous No.12257441]

>>12256945
I mean the rhetoric the UK labour party in the early 20th century was generally critical of immigration

[Anonymous No.12257552]

>>12256476
Based pseuds punisher anon

[Anonymous No.12257660]

>>12256924
>conjecture: hauntology has an intrinsically sonic dimension
>Derrida's neologism uncovers the space between Being and Nothingness
>Kubrickians

is this seriously what passes for modern political theory now? I figured this book was just some shitty quick-cash scheme and never looked into it but jesus christ it's worse than I could have imagined

[Anonymous No.12257691]

>>12256924
>This, along with pic related is why I have no interest in delving further into his body of work

[Anonymous No.12257764]

>>12256924
that picture isn't from Capitalist Realism, I know because I fucking took it. I'm starting to think you've never even read it and you just want to shitpost.
>I don't like film analysis I like real writers
>but stop quoting so many real writers
>he never came up with a post-capitalist utopia he only pointed out problems
it should have been you not him
>>12257691
that's not even Fisher

[Anonymous No.12257778]

>>12256940
He can easily get funding from communist countries or organizations.

[Anonymous No.12257808]

Anyone interested in debt from an economic perspective should AVOID this piece of shit.
I recommend Big Debt Crises by Ray Dalio.

[Anonymous No.12258316]

>>12257764
>that picture isn't from Capitalist Realism, I know because I fucking took it.

I never claimed it was you fucking retard, re-read the context in which I posted it.
>This, along with pic related is why I have no interest in delving further into his body of work

Yeah no shit it's not from Capitalist Realism, like I said in response to that image before, it makes CR look profound and coherent by comparison.

In contrast with my post, you literally have no fucking arguments to present in defense of Fisher's supposed "brilliance," so I can conclude you are a bad faith shill and I'm sorry I wasted my time trying to argue with you sincerely. I will still shit on Fisher's work on this board but no longer feel any obligation to humor you.

[Anonymous No.12258342]

>>12257808
>Raymond Dalio (born August 8, 1949) is an American billionaire investor, hedge fund manager, and philanthropist.

>he has directed millions in donations to the David Lynch Foundation, which promotes and sponsors research on Transcendental Meditation.

wats with the bourgie and always this weird shit

[Anonymous No.12258443]

>>12257660
>is this seriously what passes for modern political theory now?
For brainlets, absolutely. This is from Fisher's other book, the one with "hauntologies" in the title. I have no desire to read that one, I think that image sums it up well enough.

[Anonymous No.12258460]

>>12256293
Absolutely true. Verso is pretty bad, but Zero is a million times worse. The same fucking losers who published Kill All Normies. Idiots

[Anonymous No.12258485]

>>12256500
Consider your statement. If he was scientific, then his key hypotheses like labor theory of value, that profits would over time go to zero, and surplus value have been falsified, in which case continuing to believe them is wrong.

[Anonymous No.12258763]

>>12256935
>being against emigrants and immigrants wage cutting natives is traditionally a marxist stance
It's almost like this is exactly why they favor unionization you fucking pseud.

[Anonymous No.12258764]

Mark Fisher is for liberals who don't understand class conflict and still have petite-bourgeois mindset. Read fucking Marx.

[Anonymous No.12258798]

>>12258342
>wats with the bourgie and always this weird shit
Rich people are forced to confront the ennui when it turns out that profits, prestige, and material wealth won't save you from the problem of nihilism

[Anonymous No.12259058]

>>12256485
zb isn't dead yet :^)

[Anonymous No.12259071]

>>12256924
woah.
I'm embarrassed I considered paying actual money for Ghosts of My Life for the briefest second. Cheers anon, my wallet and soul thank you for that pic.

[Anonymous No.12259165]

>>12259071
Glad I could help you save some money and time.

[Anonymous No.12259409]

>>12258485
Kek. Clearly you have no sense of the history of economics. Smith and Ricardo where advocates for this theory before Marx. Clearly they are not social scientists or had a sense of 'the science of economics'.

[Anonymous No.12259412]

>>12256275
>reading shitty non-fiction
You had it coming, pal.

[Anonymous No.12259589]

All of you have been memed by just coming here. You're all literally walking memes. All of your literary interests are memes. You can't avoid being memed. You are the meme.

[Anonymous No.12259596]

>>12256935
Reminder that Marx explicitly promoted
capitalist immigration to act as communist accelerationism

[Anonymous No.12260461]

>>12259589
>You're all literally walking memes

speak for yourself bud

[Anonymous No.12260485]

>>12256935
>>12256947
Hence the push for humanizing and unionizing these people? You people seems to act as if the anti-scab movement succeeds in its role when it failed to do jack shit.

[Anonymous No.12260495]

Fuck off shill. This post along with the 24/7 book you keep shilling needs to go. Your marketing strategy sucks dick

[Anonymous No.12260513]

>>12260495
I’m not selling anything, Zero Books cuck. Go have another wank about “hauntologies” you fart-sniffing pseudlet.

[Anonymous No.12260543]

>>12259589
perhaps... anon - it ::: ~may~ be \\\you/// —::;;::— that is the MemE

[Anonymous No.12260820]

>>12260513
Lmao ironic I'm being called psued by the faggot who seriously thinks mass media analyzation is useless because of your distaste of 'pop culture'. You sound like every 14 year loser who thinks they're enlightened because of their rejection of popular media when in reality they have nothing to say themesleves except critique(trash teir I might add) of whatever is being pushed in front of them. I'll say it again, shill your half baked ideas somewhere else, this is like the fourth time I seen this shitpost

[Anonymous No.12260875]

>>12260820
>he thinks "hauntology" is a valid and useful concept for anything but mental masturbation

I've read enough garbage media studies to know that Fisher is a hack. Not all media studies are garbage (see for example, the excellent work by Richard Slotkin in "Gunfighter Nation") but Fisher's approach and subject matter is.

These pages >>12256924 are essentially unreadable word salad that only appears profound to people who think the more obscure and inane the analysis, the more profound it is. If being unimpressed by this kind of crap makes me a pseud, so be it. I'll stick with reading what I enjoy.

[Anonymous No.12261438]

[Anonymous No.12261645]

>Fisher gets shilled
>anon duped into buying it
>anon reads it, hates it, and wages a fight to counter the shilling

Why doesn't this happen more often? Tells me that most people here don't actually read the flavor of the month books.

[Anonymous No.12261674]

>>12261645
haven't read anything from Land but meme in most his threads

[Anonymous No.12261900]

>>12256275
>books that include a question in the title
>not trash

[Anonymous No.12262401]

I bought Infinite Jest.

[Anonymous No.12262434]

>>12260875
>These pages are essentially unreadable word salad
oh so your just retarded? wtf man don't do shit like this I almost took your recommendation

[Anonymous No.12262439]

>>12260485
Unionising them into what? There are no big factories. Unison is a conglomerate of middle class jobs. Today's working class work in retail jobs and the gig economy. There's no common proletarian identity. Communism was only feasibly back in the 1900's when everyone wore the same coat.


A proletariat of trannies, hipsters, and gamers is doomed from the start


>>12259596
Yeah, make things aggressively more shit to speed up the dialectic. See how well that goes down with ordinary voters

[Anonymous No.12262441]

>>12258485
>anything scientific must be right
wtf are you on about?

[Anonymous No.12262470]

>>12262434
>retarded
This word has lost all meaning.

[Anonymous No.12262481]

>>12262470
it means the state of being a retard

[Anonymous No.12262502]

>>12256275
Preliminary Materials for a Theory of the Young-Girl

[Anonymous No.12262532]

I was memed into looking up Behead All Satans on Amazon and read the free preview pages on the site. Aside from some disturbing passages and imagery most of it was pretty stupid.

[Anonymous No.12262984]

Land basically tore down Fisher's philosophy in his Critique of Transcendental Miserablism.

[Anonymous No.12263006]

>>12261645
I read the meme trilogy for the culture. Why should I be so mad that I need to wage a jihad against it because only 1 out of the 3 were worth my time?

[Anonymous No.12263074]

>>12262984
Link?

[Anonymous No.12263250]

>>12263074
>he doesn't own Fanged Noumena

[Anonymous No.12263264]

>>12262984
Fisher trashed Land way harder in TvA

[Anonymous No.12263407]

>>12256299
>Abandoning an 80pg book

You could finish it in a day if even you didn't like it

[Anonymous No.12263704]

>>12262532
the book works. kys

[Anonymous No.12264486]

>>12263407
The worse a book is, the harder it is to finish. An 80 page bad book can be a real slog to get through vs a 200+ good book you can finish in a weekend because you want to keep reading.

[Anonymous No.12264675]

>>12263704
>the book works

And what exactly was it?

[Anonymous No.12264712]

>>12256275
>media studies essay
why is this the worst thing in the world, exactly?
Do you not think movies and popular culture in general can provide some pretty key insights into the predominant relations of production in their current form?

[Anonymous No.12264733]

>>12264712
>Do you not think movies and popular culture in general can provide some pretty key insights into the predominant relations of production in their current form?
They can, but not from him or most "media studies" majors. Historians unironically do their field better than they do it themselves. Fisher is definitely not historically-trained.

[Anonymous No.12264749]

>>12264733
Maybe so. He mostly uses media to illustrate points, for segways, etc. anyways.
The value I see in this book is about how insidious capitalism is today, culturally, and the various ways in which we are trapped in capitalist logic often without realizing.

[Anonymous No.12264757]

Yeah Fisher doesn't really offer much different insight than that of The Selfish Capitalist or The Society of the Sane, but he does condense a lot of those types of ideas into a very digestible, accessible little book
He added a cool factor to Leftist analysis that had been lacking for a long long time, so I don't think he should be quite as popular as he is but I also understand why - I'm sure his sui played a role in that too

[Anonymous No.12264802]

>>12258485
falsified by what?

[Anonymous No.12264826]

>>12257764
>that picture isn't from Capitalist Realism
Yeah no shit, he fucking said as much right off the bat.

[Anonymous No.12264833]

>>12256381
says what exactly? that free market capitalism is perfect and without flaw? that rich aren't getting richer and the poor aren't getting poor? that we shouldn't try to avoid the oncoming 2020 financial crisis?

[Anonymous No.12264834]

>>12256945
He didnt say wage cutting, he said "immigrants wage cutting natives"

[Anonymous No.12264858]

>>12259071
I was thinking the same thing. I keep seeing capitalist realism memed here, that anon saved me a couple bucks

[Anonymous No.12264987]

>>12262984
>>12263264
>Land vs Fisher

They're both memesters.

[Anonymous No.12265011]

The Value of Everything: Making and Taking in the Global Economy

[Anonymous No.12265037]

>>12265011

This is an excellent book

[Anonymous No.12265121]

>>12264749
wtf this is awesome
was op a faggot all along?

[Anonymous No.12265270]

>>12256989
It's a big dookie, unless you are a actual human piece of shit.

[Anonymous No.12265271]

>>12264675
>And what exactly was it?
try again, turkey lips.

[Anonymous No.12265348]

>>12262439
>Today's working class work in retail jobs and the gig economy.
>not unionizing and fighting for better labour rights in those areas
No need for you to concern troll the Left if it is so clear you don’t understand jack shit about it

[Anonymous No.12265550]

>>12256381
You should check out Capitalism by Anwar Shaikh

[Anonymous No.12266348]

Fanged Nomenana

[Anonymous No.12266683]

So you read a book of Cultural studies and are mad that it talks about culture? Cool.

[Anonymous No.12267573]

>>12266683
>watch this man destroy capitalism in three short paragraphs on Wall-E

[Anonymous No.12267708]

>>12256275
What's wrong with using popular culture to examine the current social condition? Not everything has to be esoteric and academic to be worthwhile. I find that the idea of hauntology is definitely a condition of the 21 at century. Of course, fashion and culture is recycled but we are in an age in which cultural progress has been stunted. Look at the vaporwave aesthetic or the return of Chucky sneakers. Everything is recycled and in the process of reifing what had once past, our human reincarnation of the past takes an increasingly corrupt form. I do not consider myself left wing yet the k punk blogs from the author is very well written and interesting. Probably one of the best walls of text available on the internet for the internet's sake