/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19209131]

I'm trudging through picrel. So far I find it incredibly illuminating. However, I am vaguely ignorant of history. This is worrisome, for I might not be getting the most out of this. I will still finish the book despite my lacking foundational knowledge, but I wonder what book(s) I can use afterward to fix my historical ignorance. Any recommendations?

[Anonymous No.19209355]

>>19209131
Spengler's 'Decline of the West' is a wonderful companion book to this. In the book he sets out to explain the growth/decline cycle of every contemporary civilization. Ellul basically picks up where he left off to explain technique's impact and function on modern society.

[Anonymous No.19209362]

>>19209355
is there anything i should read before untergang des abendlandes?
i'm interested in it for a while already

[Anonymous No.19209390]

>>19209362
I would say reading some of Neitchze's shorter works such as "Birth of Tragedy" and "Genealogy of Morality" could help you understand the modern individulaistic perspective.

[Anonymous No.19209424]

>>19209390
Anything to read before these two by Nietzsche?

[Anonymous No.19209443]

>>19209424
wanted to ask the same question!
i'm very interested in nietzsche and am currently trying to read some of the relevant thinkers before him, but that could certainly take a while...

[Anonymous No.19209495]

>>19209424
>>19209443
I mean at that point you should literally start with greeks as the meme goes. They were basically the standard for any academic of the premodernist age and integral to the western canon. A handful of Plato's dialogues and at least an overview of the presocratics and greek playrights, pic related is decent but just find any translation/author you can enjoy reading; Neitchze is going to flip everything you previously read on its head anyways.

[Anonymous No.19209557]

>>19209424
You’re going to keep asking that question until you hit the “start with the Greeks” wall, anon. You might as well take it from there.

[Anonymous No.19209595]

>>19209131
There are books by authors other than this faggot, Debord, and the pedophile duo. I hate this board.

[Anonymous No.19209714]

>>19209595
>the pedophile duo
Who?

[Anonymous No.19209752]

>>19209595
Name one.

[Anonymous No.19209772]

>>19209714
Finger Nails and Fungus Daughter
>>19209752
Economy and Society by Max Weber. That's where you start and finish.

[Anonymous No.19209901]

>>19209772
You're actually right, I forgot about Weber, but I dont think you can put Ellul in the same category as Deleuze and Guattari.

[Anonymous No.19209967]

>>19209131
it shines some light on the book when you take into consideration ellul's devout christianity and his theological writings. he was also a protestant in france, which definitely tints one's viewpoint

[Anonymous No.19209977]

>>19209901
yeah D/G is a retarded comparison. lewis mumford is better

[Anonymous No.19210038]

>>19209901
>>19209977
They're sociology-adjacent in that they don't really commit themselves to one discipline of philosophy in any given work. Metaphysics my ass.

[Anonymous No.19210053]

>>19210038
Modern problems require modern solutions.

[Anonymous No.19210132]

>>19209977
You mean Junger.

[Anonymous No.19210542]

>>19209131
Start with the Greeks I guess. Or get some (good) books on historical topics/eras you want to read about and go from there.
Revolt Against the Modern World was unironically very helpful as both a companion and a counterpart to Ellul. But also requires knowledge of history so not that helpful right now.
Be sure to read Ellul's Propaganda as well, very important book.

[Anonymous No.19211505]

>>19210542
Ooo, I haven't seen this one talked about before. Thanks, I definitely will!

[Anonymous No.19212705]

>>19210542
i honestly thought propaganda would be underwhelming after TTS but it's excellent so far. only 80 pages in or so but one of the first things that struck me was that propaganda is not only about influencing opinion, but inciting action. this makes me consider some basic public behavior that is politicized, which essentially means propagandized these days. consider all the pushy progressives that don't care who you vote for, they just want to make sure you "get out and VOTE". that is propaganda, the purpose of which is to validate the political establishment, and our "democracy". another example is the vaccine. "just go get vaccinated!" to validate capital-s Science, the institution rather than science, the process.

he later talks about how the propagandist uses facts to tell lies. this one is pretty well known at this point, but they present facts in a misleading way, the interpretation of the facts is where they deceive. he even makes fun of the ben shapiro types that angrily tally up all the hypocrisies and contradictions only to see that no one gives a fuck. i can't help but think about the progressive obsession with "fact-checking"... they think the facts are important because they're the truth. the real reason for fact-checking is simply that the propagandist must remain in control of the facts but also, and more importantly, their interpretation.

[Anonymous No.19213395]

>>19209967
Ellul was a catholic

[Anonymous No.19213406]

>>19209772

If you've already finished by reading Weber why didn't you kill yourself them? I hate haters

[Anonymous No.19213829]

>>19209355
>Spengler for Ellul
Man, this board is really about holistically harmonizing their fringe authors.
Next you’ll say Jünger is an essential stepping stone and Baudrillard, Land the next logical step after Ellul.

[Anonymous No.19214025]

>>19213829
Now I'm just confused. I was ready to read Spengler afterward. Is that not the move?

[Anonymous No.19214198]

>>19214025
Spengler is great. It is just not a typical suggestion for someone to learn more history from.
Have wikipedia open next to you as you read Spengler though, because you will need to look up a lot of stuff as his elaborations aren't intended for philistines.

[Anonymous No.19214527]

>>19213829
>Jünger is an essential stepping stone
He is. He wrote the best book on technology, and should have been read first in that regard. Ellul owes a great debt to him, and mentions him throughout the book. And the book doesn't require much historical knowledge, it's written very simply.
Mumford may be good as well.
Spengler is a bit of a meme, and even if you think he's right he's a terrible start for history. You want to read Herodotus, Thucydides, and Polybius to know what history is all about, and Tocqueville for your modern history.
Not only was Tocqueville correct in his analysis and predictions, his approach to historiography is the right one and he is easy to read. Politically and sociologically there is no better basis either.
There is nowhere near as much to be learned from Spengler, and you won't even be able to try as a beginner anyway.

[Anonymous No.19214536]

>>19214527
And of course, Plato's five dialogues is the best overall introduction to thought, which will help greatly even in history.

[Anonymous No.19214889]

>>19214527
Man, at this point I'm so lost. Seems like I can't read anything until I first read 100 other books.

[Anonymous No.19215191]

>>19214889
No, you don't have to do that.
If you can't figure out what to read just swap between essentials and what you really want to read at the moment.

[Anonymous No.19215207]

>Don't know history
>Blather about meme books
It all makes sense now

[Anonymous No.19215226]

>>19214889
>so lost
You read to read more. Reading is a joy
The problem comes in when you only read to shitpost to feel smarth
Any reading that doesn't make you feel dumb is not to be trusted

[Anonymous No.19215234]

>>19214527
sup, Jünger-anon.
Impressive how you always manage to mention your fanboying for both Jünger and Tocqueville in every unique thread.
Btw, have you ever actually read Heidegger beyond "Die Frage anch der Technik"?
>>19214889
>Seems like I can't read anything until I first read 100 other books.
if you want to do it proper then that's an accurate description.

[Anonymous No.19215242]

>>19209131
This is, seriously, why you should start with the Greeks. Ideally your parents and school would have given you a foundational understanding of world history, but I suppose you were unlucky.

[Anonymous No.19215260]

>>19215234
Why are you mad that someone contributes to the board?

[Anonymous No.19215265]

>>19215260
>Why are you mad
im not.

[Anonymous No.19215562]

>>19215234
Someone else mentioned Jünger, and the question was about history. So it's only natural to discuss Tocqueville.
The strange thing is how little they are discussed while memes get shilled without any substance.

[Anonymous No.19216336]

>>19209131
Is it essential to read The Question Concerning Technology before Ellul?

[Anonymous No.19216558]

>>19216336
No.
You should read Junger or Mumford.

[Anonymous No.19216625]

>>19216558
Where do I start with Mumford?

[Anonymous No.19217035]

>>19216625
Technics and civilization. One of the first major works on technology.

[Anonymous No.19217048]

>>19216558
This is the Covid Safety Team.
Do not. I repeat, Do not listen to this poster.

[Anonymous No.19217137]

>>19216336
Only read it if you are into Heidegger's philosophy.
As a philosophy of technology it is too "esoteric" in its applicable use for thinking.
He got his inspiration for thinking about Technik from Jünger anyways.

[Anonymous No.19217194]

>>19212705
Exactly, I read it before the entire thing began but the past year and a half have really reinforced what Ellul described in this book.

[Anonymous No.19217283]

>>19217137
Never read anything by Heidegger and I wouldn't mind if its esoteric. Where do I start with Junger? I'm trying to get a wide grasp of technology. Started with Ted and now I want to go back and read other interpretations.

[Anonymous No.19217313]

>>19217283
I dont think there is a specific "technology" reading list chart, just blindpill, accelerationism, and what not lists.
Maybe someone else can help.
I go to sleep now. :)

[Anonymous No.19217324]

>>19217313
Sweet dreams

Anyone else have a good list of must read technology books or where to go after Ted?

[Anonymous No.19217350]

>>19217283
The Failure of Technology is Junger's book.
Mumford has several books. And Ellul too.

[Anonymous No.19217714]

>>19217035
Okay, I might sound like a repeating record when I ask this... But... What do I have to read before this book then? I really don't have the motivation (currently) to start with the Greeks just so I can read about technology and civilization. Is this a good starting point???

[Anonymous No.19217765]

>>19217324
Ive heard good things about borgmann

[Anonymous No.19217783]

>>19217714
This is probably the best part about Ted's work, its easily accessible and consice in the way its written. If you really wanna dip your toes in philosophy behind it, its not going to be an easy ride.

[Anonymous No.19217786]

>>19217324

[Anonymous No.19218021]

>>19217786
Haven't read this book, but fascists say it's not fascist and people who hate fascists say it is. If you don't care about politics, is it worth a read?

[Anonymous No.19219569]

>>19217714
Just start reading.

[Anonymous No.19219602]

>>19218021
Yes it's absolutely worth reading if you don't care about politics, it's one of Evola's least political books, despite the title. It's about metaphysics and the difference between the mindset of the modern world vs the ancient world (and before).
As for his politics, I guess it depends on the definition. He wasn't a fascist as in an actual member of the party or a supporter of the regime. He even wrote books criticizing fascism. But he though it was the better option compared to capitalism and communism, and his criticism of fascism is not the usual criticism either.

[Anonymous No.19219882]

>>19215234
>Jünger-anon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHWBU6rFU40

[Anonymous No.19221481]

b

[Anonymous No.19221629]

>>19209131
What are five authors essential to read for the technology blackpill?
>Ted
>Ellul
>
>
>
Individual books are fine too.

[Anonymous No.19221892]

>>19217313
>>19217283

>Marinetti - Futurist Manifesto
>Boccioni, etc. - Technical Manifesto of Futurist Painting
>Jünger - Der Arbeiter
>Spengler - Der Mensch und Technik
>Dessauer - Philosophie der Technik
>Walter Benjamin - Das Kunstwerk im Zeitalter seiner technischen Reporudzierbarkeit
>Jünger - Die Perfektion der Technik
>Heidegger - Die Frage nach der Technik
>Norbert Wiener - Human use of human beings
>Ellul - Technological Society
>Gilbert Simondon - Du mode d'existence des objets techniques
>(Deleuez & Guattari - anit-Oedipus)
>Jacques Camatte - The World we must leave
>Kaczynski - Manifesto; technological Slavery
>Bernard Stiegler - Technik und Zeit, etc.
>David Skrbina - The Metaphysics of Technology (do not recommend)

haven't yet read, but possibly interesting:

>Ernst Kapp - Grundlinien einer Philosophie der Technik
>Jünger - Die totale Mobilmachung
>Wiener - Cybernetics
>Hans Blumenberg - Schriften zur Technik
>Neil Postman - Technopoly
>Yuk Hui - The question concerning technology in China; Contingency and Recursivity
.
.
.
.
>Byung Chul Han
>Marx - Grundrisse
>Nick Land and friends

/lit/ really needs a good
>philosophy of technology reading chart

[Anonymous No.19221903]

>>19221892
>philosophy of technology reading chart
do it

[Anonymous No.19221919]

>>19221903
I have a headache, am feeling exhausted and haven't eaten in the last 30 hours.
Maybe on the weekend.

[Anonymous No.19222013]

>>19221892
Damn Germans were pretty autistic about technology

[Anonymous No.19222040]

>>19209772
>finger nails and fungus daughter

HAHAHH holy shit

[Anonymous No.19222072]

>>19221892
Good list, anon. Definitely checking out some of the ones I haven't read yet.

[Anonymous No.19222158]

>>19217324
Dont know about him or anything about your question but I thought I let you know I also go to sleep now.

[Anonymous No.19222278]

>>19222158
Well goodnight to you too.

[Anonymous No.19222364]

>>19221892
Kapp is good. He's quite the Hegelian, and his proposition for (Aristotelian) organ projection can be found in the work of Freud and McLuhan.

[Anonymous No.19222566]

>>19221892
>ctrl-f
>no schmitt
Sad.

This won't be a definitive list, but it includes the essentials.

Schmitt - The Age of Neutralizations and Depoliticizations
Political Romanticism
Hegel and Marx
Die Buribunken
Land and Sea
Theory of the Partisan
Von der TV-Demokratie

With these, Tocqueville is also essential. He gives a perspective on technology in which it is still separate and in service to politics. Necessary for understanding its growth, and the strong politics Schmitt saw as a necessary response.

Democracy in America
Pauperism
Journeys

https://youtu.be/Dn4qjTVT4j8

[Anonymous No.19222581]

>>19222566
Tocqueville is also a precursor of what would be called the perfection of technique, an opposite theory to that of materialism. Much the same as the difference between the metamorphosis of animals and the theory of evolution.

[Anonymous No.19222694]

>>19214889
>Seems like I can't read anything until I first read 100 other books.
yes git good

[Anonymous No.19222815]

>>19222566
>>19222581

Homer. You have to understand myth for this.

Aeschylus - Prometheus Bound

Goethe - Architecture
Morphology

Heine - Die schlesischen Weber. Poetry provides something other than the historical or philosophical. One can even say that it renders many works redundant.

Stendhal - The Red and the Black

Hölderlin - Brod und Wein especially, but much of his work is essential to understand Nietzsche, Jünger, and Heidegger

Marx - Fragment on the Machines

Nietzsche - The Gay Science

Weber - Protestant Ethic
Economy and Society

Platonov - The First Socialist Tragedy. Maybe the best essay of all, particularly if one follows Herder's aesthetics of short and beautiful works.
Among Animals and Plants
The Foundation Pit

Spengler - Man and Technics. This is perhaps where generally conservative perspectives take a wrong turn and come closer to materialism/marxism. You will see the difference from Schmitt's thought.

Mumford - Technics and Civilization

Ortega - Man the Technician. Perhaps the only other work on the level of Jünger's Perfektion.
Meditations on Hunting. The other side of perfected technology.
The Sportive Origin of the State. The unknown heir to Nietzsche.

FG Jünger - Die Perfektion der Technik
Maschine und Eigentum. The second book of Perfektion.
Griechische Mythen. Essential if you are going to have any idea what Hölderlin or Ernst Jünger are talking about.

Ernst Niekisch - Regarding Ernst Jünger's "The Worker". This will be better for most people. Without an excellent background you will get filtered by Jünger, and even then...

Ernst Jünger - The Worker
Total Mobilisation
The Machine. Far easier than The Worker as well, but does not get to the essential questions.
The Forest Passage
Maxima-Minima
The Glass Bees
An der Zeitmauer
Eumeswil

Heidegger - The Question Concerning Technology

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rq1-_UPwYSM
https://youtu.be/_YeITW9A8Rk

[Anonymous No.19222821]

>>19222815
>Platonov - The First Socialist Tragedy
The online version is incomplete. You won't get the irony nor his fairy tale references there. The full version is in Soul, or perhaps Happy Moscow.

[Anonymous No.19222835]

>>19222815
Also Bogdanov and Malevich,

[Anonymous No.19223105]

>>19222815
>>19222566
If we want to make a /philtech/ reading chart, then we should stick to the actually pertinent texts and thinkers and not influences upon them. (meaning Hölderlin, Nietzsche, Goethe etc.)

These influences can be mentioned, but I think the focus should be on being able to focus on philosophy of technique as closely as possible without leaving too much out. (meaning let's omit Weber, most of Marx)

I have read Schmitt's more famous writings, didn't see any technique focus there, and I have never heard of him somehow being a relevant thinker in the philosophy of technique. (I know he was cordial with Jünger, but I never heard to what extend)

I have seen plenty of excerpts by now from Tocqueville that were really insightful, especially as a forerunner, for philosophy of technique thinking. But how can you include him in the same group as Ellul, Stiegler, Jünger, when he is much rather just, as I have said, a "prescient" forerunner?

I would for example very much want to include Kant's insight on what constitute art vs nature (how a washed up and by the water changed carved wooden sculpture found on the beach is still not nature, but remains art) from chapters in the Critique of Judgement, but including such a tome into a list strictly about philosophy of technique seems almost pernicious, so best leave him out.

[Anonymous No.19223609]

>>19223105
I was focusing on a line of technological thought related to Schmitt rather than a general chart.

But the question is a bit like what you say of Kant, who many would disagree with. What is technology for? And if technology washes up on foreign lands is it even technology anymore?
Technology is partly a mastery over nature, but in another sense it moves along with it, carries it forth, or even participates in its metamorphosis. Technology may divide us from nature, just as it can embed us further within it. This is the same as the wolf who in his patrols reveals another type of mastery over nature, and a distance from us which may seem as a wall, beyond the horizon which is out of our reach. The howling at the moon expresses this limit, or in the myth of Fenrir or Garmr something beyond it: the devouring of the world, of which nature itself seems to be adaptive, a metamorphosis of some deeper laws. Of course, such laws seem beyond the reach or comprehension of science.
More simply, the crow and eagle have a type of freedom that we will never have, and in our unknowing we may never relate through laws of nature alone. There must be something else.The

So what then is this detached series of mechanisms which appear before us? They are like parts of a broken automaton of which we no longer know its intended purpose. They might as well be a pool of severed ears (as in Jünger's image).
Here we come full circle, what is commonly understood as a separation from nature returns to that outside, or cosmological law - the same as that distant part of nature which seems so foreign to us, mythical in its distance.

The reality is that man has always been separate from nature, yet carrying it forth in a way which deepens laws and power, together in conjunction. It is what is sensed in myths of the fall. If an artifact were to wash up from the Garden of Eden would it not be of nature? And even something higher?

[Anonymous No.19223647]

>>19223609
Simply put, technology in Tocqueville's time had a very clear purpose in the democratisation of man and the creation of a new species. It was put to use, simply and without need of any explication.
One can even say that where technical questions become explicit there is a weakening - like the bridge destroyed by explosives in war, not only the bridge must be replaced but also the foundations. Engineering feats and the extra work of filling in material shortages grow in kind.
And where the perfection of man falls short - equality, freedom, the creation of a new species, the triumph over fate, whatever metaphysical reason one attributes as the end of all this work - technical man can only deepen his reliance on these unsatisfactory and failing means. So the problem grows like a cancer, or the criminal caught in a lie.

This is the fine line between perfection and failire. We see this currently with the covid crisis. There is a point of perfecting all technical means, of mastering nature completely and being without the possibility of disease, pandemics, death.
On the other hand, technology takes its very place. Spreads like cancer and is more destructive than simply letting the disease take its course. This would be true no matter how dangerous the disease is.

[Anonymous No.19223663]

>>19223647
So again, what is technology for? The answer becomes more mysterious where we see increasing failures and a type of war of attrition just to keep the defensive systems in place.
The costs becomes too great, and not only is the perfection of man abandoned as an idea, one may even consider abandonment of the species. This is creation of a new species in the very opposite sense of how democracy intended it.

Here I have hardly touched on the question of technology directly, that is in what is often a technical type of thinking in itself. But everywhere in it is the question of technology, in its metaphysical, theological, or mythic purpose.

[Anonymous No.19223705]

>>19223663
Something I neglected is how the Luddites were only able to deepen the problem of technology. In actively attacking it they lost sight of its illusive qualities, its deeper intentions in the creation of a new world, a new man, and new laws of power and dominion. In destroying technology they only accelerated its purposes and their own defeat.

In much the same way, Jünger gives an image of technology as an upside-down pyramid. If we were to confront this point we would either cut ourselves, as with the tip of a sharp knife, or cause the greater structure to topple over in top of us.
Thus if technology is mostly immaterial, an invisible and magical space, or that which is suspended against physical laws and the strength of the earth, then our questions have to be directed towards this seemingly empty yet infintely powerful space.
One may also think of a ship being pulled over a mountain. The ship itself ceases to be technology, whereas the lines of men, pulleys, tree braces, fulcrums, and systems for minimizing friction all take its place - in power, force, and metaphysical distinction.
At what point the ship returns to become a force of nature, latent or dying, depends on what force it has to begin with, and to what point it will be dissipated.

There are also the old images of Bruegel and others, in which technology rises fromnout of the earth, devouring its surface. This is not of nature, yet is one with its metamorphosis.

[Anonymous No.19223736]

>>19223705
In short, what begins as a vague feeling or preliminary may be more clear, closer to the essence, than a project that ends in failure. This is like the expedition, or sending a ship across the mountain - the purpose of which seemed so clear in the beginning, and then the end of the world where it all goes wrong.
So the indistinct lines of Goethe, Hölderlin, or Tocqueville will say much more than several volumes from an author who has lost sight of the essence of technology, or does not even know what questions to ask.
The old problem of not seeing the forest for the trees; one misses the megamachine or the Leviathan for all its scattered parts, removed steel through years of sharpening, and shiny appearance of the new but untested parts.

[Anonymous No.19223755]

>>19223736
An example from Schmitt:

"The process of continuous neutralization of various domains of cultural life has reached its end because technology is at hand. Technology is no longer neutral ground in the sense of the process of neutralization; every strong politics will make use of it. For this reason, the present century can only be understood provisionally as the century of technology. How ultimately it should be understood will be revealed only when it is known which type of politics is strong enough to master the new technology and which type of genuine friend-enemy groupings can develop on this new ground.

Great masses of industrialized peoples today still cling to a torpid religion of technicity because they, like all masses, seek radical results and believe subconsciously that the absolute depoliticization sought after four centuries can be found here and that universal peace begins here. Yet technology can do nothing more than intensify peace or war; it is equally available to both. In this respect, nothing changes by speaking in the name of and employing the magic formula of peace. Today we see through the fog of names and words with which the psycho-technical machinery of mass suggestion works.

Today we even recognize the secret law of this vocabulary and know that the most terrible war is pursued only in the name of peace, the most terrible oppression only in the name of freedom, the most terrible inhumanity only in the name of humanity. Finally, we also see through the mood of that generation which saw only spiritual death or a soulless mechanism in the age of technicity. We recognize the pluralism of spiritual life and know that the central domain of spiritual existence cannot be a neutral domain and that it is wrong to solve a political problem with the antithesis of organic and mechanistic, life and death. A life which has only death as its antithesis is no longer life but powerlessness and helplessness. Whoever knows no other enemy than death and recognizes in his enemy nothing more than an empty mechanism is nearer to death than life. The comfortable antithesis of the organic and the mechanistic is itself something crudely mechanistic. A grouping which sees on the one side only spirit and life and on the other only death and mechanism signifies nothing more than a renunciation of the struggle and amounts to nothing more than a romantic lament. For life struggles not with death, spirit not with spiritlessness; spirit struggles with spirit, life with life, and out of the power of an integral understanding of this arises the order of human things. Ab integro nascitur ordo."

He hardly says anything about the specifics of technology, its mechanisms or property, yet grasps its very law and how it relates to the shifting nature of man.

[Anonymous No.19223846]

>>19223755
And a final attempt at being concise.
Much like Ortega's point that one does not hunt in order to kill, but kills in order to have hunted, we can say that man does not create technology as something in itself, as an end which will find a new form or species of man. Instead, it is the highest expression of this new man which brings technology to fruition.
Where this is stagnant or fails one may falsely see technology as the cause. howver, like the hunter who does not arrive at the kill the trail may have been simply lost, weather intervened, or there was an incredible act of fate.
To focus on technology alone is to lose sight of the greater laws which bring it to the surface; to starve in the face of new game over what was lost in memory.

[Anonymous No.19224047]

Janny deleted the thread on feminism and technology. Even stopped it from being archived.

[Anonymous No.19224222]

>>19209355
Fuck Spengler.

[Anonymous No.19224467]

What about mechanization takes command? Or The Engineers and the Price System ?

[Anonymous No.19225394]

>>19224467
Explain.

[Anonymous No.19225479]

>>19224467
mechanization takes command is great. It's also probably the most esoteric book I've read. The chapter on the evolution of Bread-making is fantastic. It got me into baking. Also the chapter about how Russian Bathouses/ saunas are a form of spiritual and physical regeneration.

I highly recommend to anyone reading this to seek out a pdf of it and just read even those two chapters. Soulful stuff.

[Anonymous No.19225613]

>>19224047
I save everything anyway.

Our society is feminine, not exactly a matriarchy but in service to feminine characteristics. Obviously this can only do one thing, bring out the worst characteristics in men, and even those characteristics which are traditionally strong will be manipulated by this.
It is a bit like the manlet who has learned that he can only fight through treachery and manipulation. He is of the criminal type, but his scars are hidden for his favour to feminine rules and principles. Particularly where mandates make it impossible to fight back he has an advantage over any man who still holds to values. He neutralizes feminine spaces by returning an element of competition, but for all the disorderliness and drama this only strengthens dependence on feminine character.

You could also say that what we experience is a sort of gender or hormonal pessimism. The feminised and demoralised man sees that attractive women gain status, and so think that the same rules apply to him. He thus sees male value in the mirror reflection of the woman. Body dysmorphia as a metaphysical problem.
The reality is that women are attracted to status, and physical attraction is only one aspect - likely not even the most significant. Leadership, character, and the ability to provide the higher wealth of life are the other signs of a man, as seen from the feminine. Attraction, in noble societies, is not only to the beautiful or youthful man - one descended from Aphrodite - but also to the rough strength which may be seen as a type of physiognomy of leadership, character, and provision.
So what exactly has happened? Why the image of the Chad, and its cartoonish caricature (itself digitally created by the hand of an unattractive and low status woman)? It is because all of these higher traits of leadership and status meld into one where there is decadence and rule by the most nihilistic and feminine rules. All that remains is much like the simplest physical traits, rather than the old virtues and noble laws which represent a danger.
The Chad is a safe image of masculinity, saleable to the feminine and bourgeois sentiments, or whatever remains of them. He can be dressed up, rather than in a prince's clothing, in something like that of the servants, or the clowns. Although this does not capture its feminine and aseptic appearance. The short cuts and sweeping lines that are the exact opposite of the uniform, masculine clothing, begin with the introduction of homosexuality and drug addict chic in the popular image - and also the necessity to combine a sort of anti-uniform. The woman begins to wear shoulderpads, desxualizes her appearance, while the man is given shorter, tighter clothing to minimize his appearance and sexualize him in the safest way possible.
The strangest of all is that even discussing this sort of thing seems emasculating.

[Anonymous No.19225619]

>>19225613
Where there is no longer distinction of leadership and character, of providing, then they must become something else. The clownish service of the man to the woman - taking for herself the posotion of no commitments - takes the place of providing, of leadership, and character. Showing a woman a good time, which is much like the digital economy of bringing the mall and world to her, is the only distinguishing characteristic for a man. And here we see the finest of lines between the Chad and the Cuck. As Tocqueville pointed towards, the democratic man will wage civil and world wars.over trifles, just to maintain the inferior type of status which is at the core of equality. In the same way, men reduced to a ball of hormones must develop the most rigorous and manipulative schemes to maintain a sense of status before the demonic and motherly figures who want nothing more than to be cared for, to be wined and dined, to be waited on hand and foot, so that she will in turn care for him as only such a man can be cared for - to be devoured.
It is the rule of law of the prostitute willing to take and give the stolen, the killed, and the divided infant.

This also explains the preference for feminine modes of discourse rather than the old type of intellectualism. Any type of competition is dangerous and would go against the dominant feminine traits, if not equality itself.
Conservatism arrives at a point where only gossip can save the image of man. And then people wonder why everything devolves into snitchjacket sophistry. Another fine line of the pessimism of identity.

[Anonymous No.19225627]

>>19225619
And a comment I wanted to respond to:

>Perhaps this is why tech bros and entrepreneurs are being increasingly vilified by feminine social virtue.They represent the aspects of masculinity which are most relevant and impactful in the modern day - rationality and resource control. In comparison to the portrayal you’ve created for the feminine controlled persona of masculinity (the sexually oriented chad) tech bros and entrepreneurs tend to be more physically and expressively modest. It also happens that their value of reason makes them opposed to the feminized woke cultural realignment, and their resource independence allow them to be influential despite going against the social grain. Notice also how classical cultural virtues are a common subculture among tech people and entrepreneurs- from warrior sports to classical literature. Watch as this cultural figure becomes increasingly slandered and misrepresented in popular media.

[Anonymous No.19225655]

>>19225627
An old thread with commentary on feminism and technology.
>>/lit/thread/S17864444#p17870489

>Platonov says something similar to this. He ends his short essay on technology with a folk tale image of a plain woman in the midst of a work celebration. The ideal of communism would be that man would come to desire the plain, machine-like being who has surpassed her femininity and become a pure worker, but of course the reality is that she finds only a deeper loneliness. Even the workers retain some sense of the primal order, of a beauty which can only flow like rivers of blood. Ideology, even communism, cannot surpass what is formed within the sex, and leverages character like a fulcrum. Women begin to disappear within the technical world, they must either embrace death or turn against their own spirit and land.

[Anonymous No.19225671]

>>19225655
And Jünger:
>Women are not of that gadgeteering species to which the technician belongs. Nor are they mechanics, fit servants for the machine. Technical progress, which favors the emancipation of woman in order to absorb her as a worker in its organization, not only robs her of her womanly power, it also impairs her in her deepest purpose. The sight of women employed in technical activities always has something incongruous about it. Lawrence rightly says that one leaves woman behind when one goes to the machine. And indeed, why should women be tinkering with machines? Their forte lies in quite another direction. Women pre-eminently belong to the life-giving side of existence, whereas the machines confront us with a dead world of sterile, sexless automatons.

[Anonymous No.19225704]

>>19225671
One can say that total mobilisation is at odds with the masculine figure of the technician. If there is to be total mobilisation, then it must include women and children, perhaps even the animals and plants.
This is where the Russian soul may see what the Europeans could not. To a great extent the paternal order had lost its dedication to the hearth, which governed family law in ancient times.

Platonov captures all of this perfectly, and one sees, at the same time, a fabulous type of technology in which the animals take part in the metamorphosis, yet in a monstrous way.

What is more, the domestic upkeep, the territory as a vessel or earthen cup, and care for materials that is much like that of a nursemaid is all very feminine.

[Anonymous No.19225728]

>>19225704
There is Hephaestus, the Cyclopes, Prometheus, and Antaeus, certainly. But there is also Athena, Arachne, Gaea, and Artemis (who is responsible for the weapons of war, if only as they are passed down).
And of course, woman herself who in the form of Pandora is the perfect mechanical creation. She is woven into the world where man begins to fall away from both gods and titans.

[Anonymous No.19225763]

>>19225728
Much of industrial development surrounds that of domestic production, not only neutralisation of territory, but an expanding frontier and salient which eventually women will take over. If men are at the forefront in this global expansion then they are at the edges. Thus the pregnant growth of the earth forces women to be at the center of mobilisation. If man must at once be scholar, priest, doctor, psychologist, and technician, then woman must be mother, caregiver, seamstress, nursemaid, along with all of these demands placed on the democratic citizen. The roles at once increase in power yet are diluted in their distinct impressions.

And man welcomes this in some cases, to be freed of the domestic constraints. This is not unlike the hunter who escapes to the boundaries. This is also where industrialism is most romantic, particularly in North America in which the titanism of nature overcomes any appearance of technological titans - at least until the very end. For Europeans the monstrosity could be seen from the beginning, whereas for North Americans industry could perform a function like that of hidden miliotary bases.

[Anonymous No.19225883]

>>19225763
And of course, the spinning jenny as a dominant image along with the train - which is the very picture of the mobilisation of domestic life. Transition of the world and resettlement. One sees this early on with the Land of Cockaigne. There is never any opposition between bourgeoisie and worker, and in fact it is the bourgeois figure who is dominant. This is where Tocqueville's image is so strong, the worker who does not even see himself as a worker. Each is only a type within the metamorphosis of power which is the Third Estate.
Just as the anarchist and simple baker are combined in Chaplin's image, or that the ingredients for the atom bomb are already listed on the walls of the chemist's shop. The figure himself is only a coming into being of perfection - one must be an apostolate against all the dreadful misery, and yet also declare himself as the iceberg set forth into the hull of the Titanic.

These are all manly things. And yet where woman is created as the perfect machine, not only in its image, then one might say she is all the more prepared for this monstrous life. She is more than willing to marry herself off to plainness, and to be stripped of outward appearances so that her inner core might be freed. This is passed down from Aphrodite to Dull Griet: only a woman can plunder hell and remain unscathed. Whereas a man, captured in the figure of Orpheus, cannot even look behind himself. For the hidden ugliness reveals itself fully in what is plain.

The woman abandoned to her home and cutting up her dress is no less technological than the Komsomol who masters state organisation with plain charm rather than Stakhanovite dedication. She may even take over the figure of Oblomov, yet will be praised as the very face of extraordinary effort.

https://youtu.be/U7qNPcd8zl4

[Anonymous No.19225890]

>>19221892
By the way, the Schmitt comment wasn't directed at you, but the thread in general.

[Anonymous No.19225908]

>>19225763
>an expanding frontier and salient which eventually women will take over.
She then must become divine counsel over the land, but also the barbarian hordes overtaking it. This, again, is already in the image of Dull Griet.

[Anonymous No.19225928]

>>19225883
Perhaps none of this will make sense. However, it is the very reason we see females taking over administration, not only as a human resources and domestic problem, but the very face of police and state organisations - to which the conservative could never anticipated their belonging.

[Anonymous No.19226423]

>>19225479
>Russian Bathouses/ saunas are a form of spiritual and physical regeneration.
Isn't this literally obvious?

[Anonymous No.19227143]

>>19222815
How does Ted compare?

[Anonymous No.19227826]

>>19209495
>start with greeks

[Anonymous No.19227949]

>>19209495
>Neitchze
can you at least try and spell it correctly?

[Anonymous No.19227990]

>>19227143
Ted basically reforms Ellul to his contemporary conditions, but is not as thorough as Ellul. Still worth reading.

[Anonymous No.19228524]

>>19223609
Sorry. I wont be able to read and reply to your post before this weekend.

[Anonymous No.19228621]

>>19212705
>consider all the pushy progressives that don't care who you vote for, they just want to make sure you "get out and VOTE". that is propaganda, the purpose of which is to validate the political establishment, and our "democracy".
Ernst Junger says something like this towards the beginning of The Forest Passage. The ruling party will go all out and campaign for their candidate, and even celebrate prematurely on election because they are so sure their candidate has won. People who see the intimidation and tyranny is such a display will vote for the opposing candidate, but by ding so, they have fallen into the ruling party's trap. By voting for the opposing candidate, they have voiced a dissenting opinion, which validates the democratic process. As long as neither candidate gets 100% of the vote, no one can say people do not have the freedom to vote for the person they want to win.

[Anonymous No.19229227]

>>19227990
Ted rules.

[Anonymous No.19229828]

>>19228524
That's fine. Thanks for letting me know.

[Anonymous No.19229892]

>>19209495
Ignore this prick. Read something like this.
https://publish.iupress.indiana.edu/projects/nietzsche-s-existential-imperative
Then read Gay Science for a few pages. Then read something short and stop with books so you can let your new life be about living out your newfound philosophy.

[Anonymous No.19230218]

>>19209131
The entire time I was reading this book I kept thinking of people who speedrun video games

[Anonymous No.19230333]

>>19210542
i cant find the epub in french and the book is $50

[Anonymous No.19230526]

>>19230333
Library?

[Anonymous No.19230829]

>>19230333
really? should be easy.

[Anonymous No.19230837]

>>19230333
https://b-ok .as/book/4450875/0c26b2

[Anonymous No.19231447]

>>19230218
Whos your favorite speedrunner?

[Anonymous No.19231810]

>>19230837
Histoire de la propagande and progandes are 2 different books. I am starting to think that the French dont care about him.

[Anonymous No.19232431]

>>19231810
The French people are the polar opposite of Ellul in every way besides speaking French, this should be obvious to anybody with even a basic understanding of the two entities

[Anonymous No.19232607]

>>19225728
>And of course, woman herself who in the form of Pandora is the perfect mechanical creation.
Interesting posts. Thanks for sharing.

[Anonymous No.19232672]

>>19232431
The only good frogs are the ones that are unlike the rest

[Anonymous No.19233763]

>>19232672
Is that possible?

[Anonymous No.19234660]

>>19232672
t. Socrates

[Anonymous No.19234692]

have you dudes read technopoly by postman? how does it relate to this? some of it was flawed, but i think anybody who posts on /lit/ will get something out of it, it's free on audible plus.

[Anonymous No.19235192]

>>19221919
Well it's the weekend now, in PST. Get to work

[Anonymous No.19235388]

>>19233763
Yes, there's a handful.

[Anonymous No.19235508]

so did anon made that chart?

[Anonymous No.19235732]

>>19235508
The weekend is not yet over.

[Anonymous No.19236681]

>>19235508
Why don't you make it?

[Anonymous No.19237394]

>>19236681
because i am not familiar with the subject, which is why i wanted a chart in the first place

[Anonymous No.19237447]

[Anonymous No.19237540]

>>19237447
Did you make this?
I have never seen this chart before.

[Anonymous No.19237567]

>>19237540
Yeah.
>>19237447
Typo in Camatte.

[Anonymous No.19238253]

>>19237567
Why not use the new cover of Tech Slavery?

[Anonymous No.19238754]

>>19222815
>FG Jünger - Die Perfektion der Technik
>Maschine und Eigentum. The second book of Perfektion.
in german these are usually counted as one book or at least sold that way.

[Anonymous No.19239188]

>>19237567
I do hope it's readable.

Good night!

[Anonymous No.19239283]

>>19239188
Probably double your res.

[Anonymous No.19239933]

>>19237394
Have you read anything?

[Anonymous No.19240263]

>>19239188
Can we get English titles, please?

[Anonymous No.19240732]

>>19240263
>>19237567

[Anonymous No.19240850]

>>19239933
on this subject only read ted's manifeso

[Anonymous No.19240861]

>>19237567
>>19239188
Hell yeah!
Thank you very appreciated

[Anonymous No.19241108]

>>19240850
Zerzan and Perlman are sort of similar.

[Anonymous No.19241239]

>>19240263
yeah, ill remake it with simple black background, higher res and english titles.

[Anonymous No.19241670]

Can someone explain what Ellul meant by 'magic'?

[Anonymous No.19241872]

>>19241670
Magic what?

[Anonymous No.19241984]

>>19241670
The Technological Society, p. 24.
>It may seem questionable; nevertheless, magic is a technique in the strictest sense of the word, as has been clearly demonstrated by Marcel Mauss. Magic developed along with other techniques as an expression of man’s will to obtain certain results of a spiritual order. To attain them, man made use of an aggregate of rites, formulas, and procedures which, once established, do not vary. Strict adherence to form is one of the characteristics of magic: forms and rituals, masks which never vary, the same kind of prayer wheels, the same ingredients for mystical drugs, for formulae for divination, and so on. All these became set and were passed on: the slightest variation in word or gesture would alter the magical equilibrium.
>There is a relationship between the ready-made formula and a precise result. The gods being propitiated obey such an invocation out of necessity; all the more reason that they be given no opportunity to escape compliance because the invocation is not correctly formulated. This fixity is a manifestation of the technical character of magic: when the best possible means of obtaining the desired result has been found, why change it? Every magical means, in the eyes of the person who uses it, is the most efficient one.

[Anonymous No.19243221]

>>19223846
not op but just wanted to say thanks for the high quality posts anon, i enjoyed reading them

[Anonymous No.19243559]

>>19243221
No problem. Difficult questions which deserve an attempt at a serious answer.

[Anonymous No.19244318]

>>19237567
Very based

[Anonymous No.19245789]

>>19241984
Interesting.

[Anonymous No.19245967]

>>19237567
>>19241239
what do you use to make these/

[Anonymous No.19246872]

>>19245967
Photoshop probably.

[Anonymous No.19246984]

>>19217048
funny. most relvent post and no one got it.

[Anonymous No.19247353]

>>19230218
Please do elaborate

[Anonymous No.19247595]

>>19246984
Just put on your mask anon. It's not hard.

[Anonymous No.19248526]

>>19241984
Anyone explain?

[Anonymous No.19249467]

>>19238253
Is it better?

[Anonymous No.19251198]

>>19241984
It was over before it began, wasn't it?

[Anonymous No.19252671]

b

[Anonymous No.19253507]

I'm just postin in this thread because it's over a week old and it's very good, keep it up /lit/

[Anonymous No.19254440]

>>19209355
>Spenglertrash
Lol

[Anonymous No.19255546]

>>19253507
Let's keep it going.