Is postmodernism a fraud?

i mean the politics of victimology, the scapegoating, the censorship, denunciations, all of it. the inevitable slide into kinds of ideological authoritarianism more Stalinist than postmodern. Lyotard's fundamentally sane description - skepticism about metanarrative - morphed somewhere along the way into a kind of demented exercise in collaborative scapegoating. whether you think this is a bug or a feature is up to you. it's definitely a new phase of some kind, whatever it is. but so was Stalin to Lenin, or Robespierre and Saint-Just to the Tennis Court Oath.

you can't found your politics on literary criticism. DFW knew it too.

A lot of it is just pointing out the obvious flaws in language

No. Some of the the critiques are useful, but it sometimes creates the counter-reactionary effect of “it’s old, so it’s bad”.

this. Barthes is awesome, you can learn all kinds of stuff from him. he holds up well.

but basically this user is right. it's valuable when understood in the right way. that it turned into social justice juggernaut is a whole other thing.

Attached: Barthes.jpg (780x520, 105K)

you know in my day everyone on Yea Forums was a bunch of postmodern dfw-pynchon memeboys

what's the fraud? what's to be gained by being postmodern? it's just a particular weighting of a collection of characteristics.
Maybe OP doesn't understand what the term means.

>today it's turned into
>it's turned into
then it's no longer post-modernism.
coin a term and apply it.
nevermind, I'll do it:

>Modernism
>Postmodernism
>Post-postmodernism
...and now we enter:
>New Strife
The New Strife era is upon us.
All hail the New Strife!

Cap this, and tell your ancestors you were here when I named an era.

Attached: 155320743047534509343475 side arrow .png (338x256, 9K)

It's a meme

Yes
- t. Félix Guattari

I read an article on postmodernist serial murder and it was then that I knew postmodernism was all irredeemable garbage.

According to Foucault postmodernism means "I won't criticize your economic system if you give me unlimited sexual freedom"

it's a race to be the Mostmodernist

You should definitely read capitalism and schizophrenia at least

Ladies and gentlewomen Foucault was the last of the great giants great giant. There hasn't been any person after him whose output is of comparable magnitude. You can say Chomsky but that's just try hard cope. Apart from laying the foundations for formal languages chumsky hasn't done anything significant. And let's not forget the study of formal languages had a lot of work done on it by the computer scientists before it became useful in any sense.

Foucault was just a gay pop-philosopher. The Zizek or Peterson of his time.

>Ladies and gentlewomen Foucault was the last of the great giants great giant
even he would have said Sartre was more interesting. same way Deleuze would have said Spinoza was the endboss. if there's anything to be learned from the postmodernists it's the importance of re-reading the guys who came before them, before they closed themselves into the bubble of Everything Is Discourse.

>DFW knew it too.
Wasn't sure until I saw this. Good one John

Post modernism is right. Philosophical inquiry is the fraud.

Rorty was right you know. Philosophy is useless. It is a self indulgent act that is to be done in your own free time. There hasn't been a single problem that humanity has faced that philosophy has solved which something else like common sense or the 'force of the crowd' hasn't already solved to a good enough degree. If anything philosophical extreme of any line of thought has only helped in justifying shit which already works. I'll now go involve myself in another more rewarding self indulgent act---masturbating while simultaneously stroking my prostate with my left middle finger. I suggest you do the same. For a brief moment you can forget our collective pathetic existence and coast on a quick sparkle of a joyous wave.

post modernity is essentially living without forced ideology - everything is permitted

Still don't understand the problem with this guy and sartre

sensibilities =/= philosophical modes

>HISTORY IS ALWAYS RIGHT
damn, dummies en masse up in this mf'er

philosophy seems important for discovering the uselessness of philosophy

The history of an idea is irrelevant to the idea itself.

post modernism is for anyone who finds it interesting. but it has been hijacked by certain political ideologies. a refusal to build upon the previous works has become protest of the patriarchy. postmodernism is too deep to concern itself with surface politics. or so i think. but how the fuck should I know. i can't define it. and neither can you, asshole.

>if I say SJWs are postmodern nobody will ask
>>Why are you obsessed with SJWs?
Yeah, not how words work. Everytime you misapply the term to the shit show that is North America, all you're telling people is that you learnt the word from YouTube. It's like when Scientologists refer to "theta", they think they mean "soul" or whatever, while Greek scholars think they're just bad at what letters are. You're using terms in a way that shows your lack of outside education and demonstrates your (lack of) sources for the word.
Most of what you're probably trying to rail against is more properly defined as modernist, and, unsurprisingly, most critiques of modernist thought are postmodern. You're shooting yourself in the foot by equating postmodernism with progressivism and SJW shit.