Has anyone ever adequately criticized what Debord says here...

Damn, how can one user be so BASED? An academically tenured expert on Benjamin, Ellul, AND Heidegger--he's a goshdarn triple-threat! I think I saw Frankfurt user once in real life at the Met. I was in a crowd, naively "appreciating" some trite paint splatter by Winslow Homer, when he walked up. He was wearing brown slacks, a pair of 7-11 flip flops, and a Member's only jacket from the Goodwill, and I just knew then and there we were all going to get transgressed on. "Heh, y'all only like this 'cause it's a commodified spectacle," sez user. "I'll be over at the Paul Klee exhibit with the real cultural critics." Then he sauntered away, trying to hide a look of smug satisfaction with one of introspective ennui. I knew he was doing it just to be thorough, to not appear as a hypocrite. But if he did smirk, it would've been justified--he was just THAT dead-on. From that point, I realized my error in not seeing "art" and Art As A Historical Process as one in the same. How foolish I'd been, thinking that I could appreciate a piece of art in-itself! And as Frankfurt user left, twirling his 256 gb USB 3.0 containing the collected .pdf files of marxists.org (gotta make sure those damn reactionaties and revisonists don't kill the repository of revolutionary theory), I knew that my life hadn't been changed forever, but rather awakened to the immortal dialectical process. Based.

representation of marginalised identities on media is very important so let's don't be dismissive of it, ok? someone like debord needs to be understood in its proper context, the sixties, french intellectualism, but uncritically appling it to current situations just leaves a bad taste in my mouth, sounds almost gamergate-ish at times, we have to be careful with this sort of nihilist everything is fake discourse which is ripe for co-option by fascists and the alt right, hypermasculine reactionary movements who seek an exit from society at all means neccesary no mather the consequences. see ''clownworld'' ''basedface'', the horrifying responses to the star wars sequels, maybe ask yourself is your reaction to ''the spectacle'' just a product of entitlement, a fact that you are no longer at the center of the spectacle, would a trans person or a person of color who fears for her life every second wallow in such despair about existential lack of authenticity. I think Debord and the SI lacked an ethic of care a sense of duty of using one's position of privilege within the system to be an ally to those less fortunate. The adolescent fantasy of smashing the system could only come from one who is already included and secure in the system but not ready to assume the responsibilities that come with their privileges. If you are a white dude that is in any way wants to be involved in the left your first job is to listen and to come to terms with your own whiteness.

I understand that much from browsing Yea Forums alone, though his level of abstraction in a lot of the notes is so far that even then it's too complex, and I felt like a more simple and direct presentation of his ideas would help a lot towards getting the message. The most useful illustration for me going in was the idea that being a man in modern society is expressed through various acts of consumption, like buying single-bladed razors or Ford trucks or whatever, and so this new medium becomes how we interface with the world. This seemed to match his message from what I read, but it was too difficult to finish it or be sure. Thanks for the recommendations.

>pseud doesn't understand
Still upset, zizekstak?

What else do you need to know?

Attached: paving stones.jpg (898x1290, 327K)

man how is it that this righteous twitter tone be so immediately recognisable
I'd love for someone to do a close analysis into exactly what it is with the way these types of posts get written that do vividly evoke the sound of a shrill white woman huffing and puffing her way through an argument

>we have to be careful with this sort of nihilist everything is fake discourse which is ripe for co-option by fascists and the alt right, hypermasculine reactionary movements who seek an exit from society at all means neccesary no mather the consequences. see ''clownworld'' ''basedface'',

Attached: 1559756947450.png (231x218, 9K)

Ive seen this post before but not in these exact words, are you refining the bait or what

you are a misogynist, probably an incel and certainly suffer from deep seated freudian issues vis a vis your mother which you project on all female authority figures.

Leftists can't meme so you can't judge.

>Alice is in trouble.[1]

>6,000 people on this planet are determined to abduct, rape, torture and kill her.

>6,000,000 are attracted to her in a way that might lead to some minimal physical contact, which very rarely results in her getting hurt or forced into anything. Actually, quite a few of these 6,000,000, like deacon Charles Dodgson, are happy just to take pictures of Alice or look at them.

>6,000,000,000 earthlings are most unlikely to fall into the first category, but may very well partake of the second, often for a very short while, maybe once in their life, or possibly only in their mind.

>6 billion of us are increasingly regarded by psychologists, cops, judges and reporters as if they could turn into those 6 millions, while these 6 millions are currently treated as if they acted like the 6 thousand. In the year 2001, Socrates would be witchhunted as a child molester, and Oxford University would sack Lewis Carroll as a child pornographer.
theanarchistlibrary.org/library/gilles-dauve-alice-in-monsterland

all those french intellectuals do is imply they should be allowed to have sex with children but never outright stating it, skirting and circling around their central precept of childfucking while keeping plausible deniability.

It's not a mystery, for one thing they all copy each other, and they speak with the alternating, sometimes combined, hysteria and smugness of the modern 'educated' woman

I am genuinely not a leftist, the messaging just comes across as confused.

7/10 Needs to include the words "spaces," "bodies," and "unpack."

as communists it is our duty to defend progressive bourgeoisie culture (such as the marvel comics universe,and the trends towards diversity and inclusion in literature) from reactionary attacks often outright fascist /pol/ astroturfing spearheaded by russian bots/trolls. Unfortunately many leftists still associate russia with the ussr, while the truth is modern russia is a reactionary christian fundamentalist and white supremacist state ruled by a russian oligarchy a system the Trump administration is doing its best to impose on the US

>reactionary christian fundamentalist and white supremacist state ruled by a russian oligarchy a system the Trump administration is doing its best to impose on the US
God this would be based. In reality Trump is a midwit retard controled by forces he's barely aware exist

I think trying to appraise authenticity is pretty much the faggiest thing that you can do, and doing so is currently making this website insufferable to visit.

what do you propose we do instead?

embrace socially conscious and creative brand synergy

based

what if regulated capitalism(moderate social democracy and green new deal) is long term compatible with intersectional social justice and environmental sustainability? it might be, but you are not willing to accept the possibility because your 'leftism' is based on reactionary fantasies of apocalyptic violence that stem from you privileged entitled upbringing, instead of LISTENING for once you are caught in the game of one upmanship, trying to be the most radical, all while rejecting and actively undermining all attempts to actually better the world

I too like being taxed to support retarded niggers and women

i guess i'll just have to sit down, shut up and listen when poc share their experience.

yeah, no thanks

Attached: 1560191466690.jpg (1300x1235, 73K)

Unironically wonder how many sincere retweets this "thread" would get

>communist
>defending progressive bourgeoisie culture
What did he mean by this?

why are you still here? if you want a platform for the ritualised ''sincere'' ''enjoyment'' of the commodity you can go to reddit.

How so?

progressive bourgeoisie culture is and will always be better than anything that could be constructed as fascist, fascist adjacent, or fascist analogue. as we all know fascism is a desperate takeover bid by the most reactionary bourgeoisie forces. I think you have failed to learn the lessons of the third international and the collapse of the popular front after the anti comintern pact. Marx himself underlined and highlighted the progressive aspects of capital, if he were alive today, he would have certainly been on board with ''woke capital'' and ''rainbow capitalism'', he would have shown nothing but the utmost contempt at white ''leftists'' who criticise beyonce or starwars or ''political correctness'' but always for the wrong reasons, circling the object petit a of wounded settler identity without ever really outright reaching it. I get it you really want to be allowed to say the 'N-Word'

Strange, didn't even know about that. But this reminds me that one of the groups surrounding him is extremely zionist.

Here:
> His Marxism is a bore.
> The idea of the spectacle is interesting, original, and mostly true.
There.

>Marx himself underlined and highlighted the progressive aspects of capital,
It is now quite plain to me — as the shape of his head and the way his hair grows also testify — that he is descended from the negroes who accompanied Moses' flight from Egypt (unless his mother or paternal grandmother interbred with a nigger). Now, this blend of Jewishness and Germanness, on the one hand, and basic negroid stock, on the other, must inevitably give rise to a peculiar product. The fellow's importunity is also nigger-like
t. Karl marx

All Marxist texts become incoherent once you remove the presupposition of a communist utopia implicit in negation. Debord and the SI deploy Lautreamont and Stirner at the service of an invariant Marxism, or else Marx and Lautreamont at the service of an invariant Stirnerism. What if the same centrifugal tendencies inherent in language/capital/the western literary tradition underlie both Marx and Baudelaire, Marx project was to create a new language fit to the description and the manipulation of the modern industrial world see the introduction to the 18th Brumaire for a clear example. ''Poetry made by all not by one''

Is this authentic communication?

I have a theory about Marx. he was hilariously insecure about being a 56%er jew with negroid features and deeply conflicted about the devious money-grubbing usurious character of his people, I can imagine him walking by some orthodox jews with their emphatic hand movements and eastern merchant demeanour and cringing. in order to escape his jewishness, he concocted this whole baroque philosophy, grounded on french enlightenment universalism and the culture he wanted to belong with desperately but knew would be forever alien, hence his identification with industrial workers a fairy tale about an all powerful demon called capital. It's no wonder marxism as a philosophy tends to appeal more to deracinated intellectuals with schizoid and or self loathing tendencies than to actual working class people.

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-06-13 at 3.15.33 AM.png (235x334, 105K)

Appraising something as bad because it's poorly made or derivative, or even because the people who like it are insufferable reddit, is distinct from appraising something based on an imagined socio-historical teleology. Everything and nothing becomes worthless when you think you can claim if something is authentic through nebulous concepts like "transgression" or "sublation." The reality is that the banalities of Mass Man are inevitable under any system provided there are enough people interfacing--that's the only real teleology here, and it's useless to point it out. Mouthbreathers networking their interests, and the sophistication of communication networks that allow them to do so, emerge without the necessary existence of some deterministic economic eschatology. Sure, the ways in which Americans, Europeans, and Chinese latch onto slop made for the lowest common denominator may manifest differently, but the same basic characteristics that unites the slop categorically exists by virtue of there being enough people interacting, and by no other preconditions. The harder you try to be "authentic," the less "authentic" you become. DFW was right to kill himself.

Foucault really did break the left, didn't he?

The funny thing about the recent influx of socialists to 4channel is that it makes the site more palatable to advertisers (understanding why is the beginning of wisdom). All this means is that this lonely silo of authentic communication will be sublimated into consumer capitalism.

Ironically, Reddit fetishises woke authenticity more than Yea Forums. They just apply it more to things traditionally seen as "commodified," and are generally far less cynical about the subject than people are here. Despite trying to rebuke a search for "authenticity," this post here enshrines it as a concept far more than any other post ITT (assuming that it isn't a shitpost, which it clearly is).

midcentury american manufacture of consent- public opinion arrived at through focus groups and surveys, managed confessionals in which ''common people'' and ''consumers'' are made to talk about their own ''authentic experiences'', a synthetic identity built in the process
maoism, cultural revolution- mass line of the party arrived at through managed confessionals where ''the oppressed'' are made to talk about their own ''authentic experiences'', a synthetic identity built in the process
Social Media- See above

To add to this, think of how the period of 2004-2008 is generally idolized by everyone on this site as the most "authentic" period of its existence--a time when there were far fewer people here, and none of them concerned themselves with making an "authentic" expression from behind a veil of post-irony.

I don't think you understand communism.

Attack peripheral systems of power, and all that remains is centralization. Foucault created his own panopticon.

People ITT who are only now realizing that communism IS sufficiently advanced capitalism. Has been since Adam Smith, who believed that the telos of capitalism was perfect equality.

what if I don't want to become authentic but indulge in self conscious artificiality as an end in itself, an esoteric snobbery of infinite indulgences? What if the problem with the spectacle is not its lack of authenticity but the fact it is not artificial enough? What if capitalism, with its banal economic eschatology, is contemptible precisely because it places a limitant on the unlimited potentials of artificiality and potlatch?

>....Or vu qu'aucun animal ne peut être snob, toute période post-historique "japonisée " serait spécifiquement humaine. Il n'y aurait donc pas d'" anéantissement définitif de l'Homme proprement dit ", tant qu'il y aurait des animaux de l'espèce Homo sapiens pouvant servir de support " naturel " à ce qu'il y a d'humain chez les hommes. Mais, comme je le disais dans la Note ci-dessus, un " animal qui est en accord avec la Nature ou l'Être-donné " est un être vivant qui n'a rien d'humain. Pour rester humain, l'Homme doit rester un " Sujet opposé à l'Objet ", même si disparaissent " l'Action négatrice du donné et l'Erreur". Ce qui veut dire que tout an parlant désormais d'une façon adéquate de tout ce qui lui est donné, l'Homme post-hlstorique doit continuer à détacher les " formes " de leurs " contenus ", en le faisant non plus pour trans-former activement ces derniers, mais afin de s'opposer soi-même comme une " forme " pure à lui-même et aux autres, pris en tant que n'importe quels "contenus ".

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-06-13 at 3.57.48 AM.png (316x378, 241K)

marxism appeals to literally billions of people outside the united states and europe you stupid reactionary shit

also clearly never read him

history ended in 1789 with the universal declaration of the rights of man, we just have some catching up to do. take kojeve pill and work to bring about an universal homogenous state

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-06-13 at 4.07.26 AM.png (272x274, 108K)

That's on you, man.

Fuck Kojeve and his faggy Hegel owl.

You still ARE a faggot, even if you're being ironic.

It's never clear if the leftist in the first two panels is made out to be the dope or not. The pictures on the right never suggest any sort of actual value judgment.

it depends on the field. no one but situationism historians or nostalgists like Sadie plant are completely on board with sots. but situationism completely failed to produce anything more than that book. media scholars acknowledge debord and refer to him but even his bigger fans like Kellner or crary think sots is too vague and limited. debord and sots are mostly important for their popular reception though, so its not like a thorough and extensive critique of the book even matters.

Or you can obliterate the fact-value distinction and start living like a human again.

Attached: lift.jpg (1835x2319, 761K)

That's only when he's post-hoc recontextualized into the preexisting host culture a la China.

This is so easy to make fun of, but at the same time you are getting at something real. Maybe someone should come in and word it correctly.

Yeet
All muslims had to do was be commodified

Amazing post

Its unfalsifiable like most Marxist bullshit

Toute la vie des sociétés dans lesquelles règnent les conditions modernes de production s’annonce comme une immense accumulation de spectacles. Tout ce qui était directement vécu s’est éloigné dans une représentation.

fuck off, you will be the first to be shot when the revolution comes

metaphysics of presence

Debord hated media scholars, who wantedto reduce him to a media critic purely moral or aesthetic neither are the situationists another chapter in art history to be failed next to the surrealists and the lettrists. Situationist writings are like Lenin's or Mao's, tactical communications aimed at a goal, the popular reception is all that matters, the structures of the academic, artistic or political spectacles are not designed to understand it. If they understood it they would see the futility of what they are doing and call it quits.

it takes a speculative leap to transcend the given and actualise the real through Action. positivism results in a managerial instrumentalist view of humans, wherein they are mere automatons that should be made to fit the existing structures of capital, to be uprooted and manipulated, socially, psychologically, and physiologically, as the impersonal forces of the market see fit. You don't seem to grasp the notion of conflict of writing to intensify existing potentialities of human action, or that positivism implies actually quite conservative and conformist moral claims.

Attached: CapitalIsColumn.jpg (1660x1105, 455K)

Strange, the entire Marxist system is really an obscure form of instrumentalism, right down to its "concept" of value. However, Marxists will engage in an endless epicycle when other competing instrumentalist, and even realist theories outcompete it for making more accurate economic and sociological models.