Which side is Yea Forums approved?

Don't care what people say, Robert Jordan is based.

robert jordan was a hack

Aside from China Miéville the left-wingers all have weak chins and hideous scraggly beards

>Picking some retarded meme sides
Brainlet manchild stance.

>genre fiction
neither side is approved you fucking nerd, stay in sffg where you belong

Attached: IMG_3851.jpg (625x612, 74.99K)

>muh looks
homosexual?

physiognomy

favorite authors have to be in black and white pic otherwise you are not a lit nerd, everyone knows that

Everyone who came into this thread knew exactly what kind of replies there would be, and yet we all still came into it anyway.
>direction brains are retarded
>right good, left bad
>left good, right bad
>who bakker, why bakker, bakker gay, bakker bakker bakker
We have fallen far anons. How much deeper can we ever go.

i like how they put lovecraft on the right wing side even though he was a socialist just because he was also racist

This is the correct answer

he was only a socialist because he was a poorfag and wanted gibs

>bakker
Literally who?

I hate ducking politics. Why’s does everyone need to see things with a political lens? When did everyone start identifying themselves with ready made labels?

ideology impacts writing, the two sides have different approaches to storytelling

he was a fascist national socialist

Martin ripped off a French nationalist author

based

Frank Herbert is not right wing. Dune is a preemptive criticism of trump and trumpism.

>a socialist..also racist
so a fascist?

Left side: women, fatties, incels, draft-dodgers, procrastinators, antinatalists

Right side: professors, war veterans, philosophers, philologists, visionaries

A story is a story. Innovators innovate. And what do left and right wing mean in the sense of literature? Right wing worships their forefathers and customs, and left wing tries to progress? Then every “right wing” writer would be considered “left wing”. Celine was certainly progressive and innovative

>Asimov, GRRM and a bunch of literal whos
Is this the best the blue team has to offer?

Fascism isn't racist, Musso himself acknowledged the concept of race but saw it as a social construct that wasn't ideologically relevant. The antisemitism of later Fascism was only done to appease Hitler.

Attached: Mussolini on race.jpg (850x400, 79.42K)

Mussolini literally feared the "rising tide of color" and frequently spoke about the glories of the Italian race, he was not race blind, he just didn't have the exact same views as Hitler so people call him some anti racist for some reason.

>“Anti-Semitism does not exist in Italy,” Signor Mussolini answered. “Jewish Italians have always been good citizens and brave soldiers. They occupy the most important positions in the universities, in the army, in the banks. There are a large number of Jews who are generals. The Commandant of Sardinia, General Modena, is a general of artillery.”
When Musso talks about the "Italian race" he's talking about the Italian nation, the culture. To Musso, Jews could be perfectly assimilated into Italian culture and then they should be treated as Italians. Racism is not the proper word to describe Musso's views since they have nothing to do with genetics or heritage, it's purely about culture.

Source: jta.org/archive/mussolini-condemns-anti-semitism-declares-that-it-is-non-existent-in-italy
It comes from an interview from 1932. As I said before, Musso only changed his rethoric later to appease Hitler, and in the end only took part in the Holocaust reluctantly and with no enthusiasm. Fascism is not a racist ideology.

i dont see any women in the left side

Right has
>father of modern fantasy (Tolkien)
>father of cosmic horror (Lovecraft)
>greatest sci fi writer (Herbert)
>greatest modern fantasy writer (Wolfe)

Left has
>GRR Martin (hack)
>Asimov (original ideas, bad writer)
>rest are literal whos

Pretty obvious choice user

whose the dude with the eyepatch?

Le Guin is a literal who?

she wrote a fantasy book but the characters had brown skin... how groundbreaking...

Top left

>socialist and racist
Reminds me of someone, I can’t quite put my finger on it

Attached: 7A5B1B5D-36B4-4C7A-B0B9-7AD26DF252C9.jpg (600x817, 78.04K)

No, it isn’t fuck off.

motherfucker do you expect me to know what all these authors look like. i just read books, man, i don't follow them on instagram

Not the left side that's for sure.

Attached: Bakker's blog.png (585x902, 348.17K)

who are the right side people? im tired of sci fi that amounts to generic liberal/leftist takes in a futuristic setting

>who are the right side people?
Legends that can never be surpassed.

>Bakker complaining about misogyny
Do any shitlibs have any self-awareness at all?

In no particular order: Tolkien, Frank Herbert, Robert Jordan, Robert Heinlein, Terry Goodkind, Gene Wolfe, Lovecraft, Robert E. Howard, Vox Day. Idk who the rest are.

Not in the picture: John C. Wright

He's a fedora tipping atheist, so no.

Attached: Bakker atheist.png (541x423, 29.63K)

>a fedora tipping atheist
Not your garden-variety fedora.

rsbakker.wordpress.com/2014/04/13/the-blind-mechanic-ii-reza-negarestani-and-the-labour-of-ghosts/

"As it stands, if Moore’s Law holds (and given this, I am confident it will), then we are a decade or two away from God.
I shit you not.
Really, what does ‘kitsch Marxism’ or ‘neoliberalism’ or any ‘ism’ whatsoever mean in such an age? We can no longer pretend that the tsunami of disenchantment will magically fall just short our intentional feet. Disenchantment, the material truth of the Enlightenment, has overthrown the normative claims of the Enlightenment—or humanism."

"Humanity possesses no essential, invariant core. Reason is a parochial name we have given to a parochial biological process. No transcendental/quasi-transcendental/virtual/causal-but-acausal functional apparatus girds our souls. Norms are ghosts, skinned and dismembered, but ghosts all the same. Reason is simply an evolutionary fix that outruns our peephole view. The fact is, we cannot presently imagine what will replace it. The problem isn’t ‘incommensurability’ (which is another artifact of Intentionalism). If an alien intelligence came to earth, the issue wouldn’t be whether it spoke a language we could fathom, because if it’s travelling between stars, it will have shed language along with the rest of its obsolescent biology. If an alien intelligence came to earth, the issue would be one of what kind of superordinate machine will result. Basically, How will the human and the alien combine? When we ask questions like, ‘Can we reason with it?’ we are asking, ‘Can we linguistically condition it to comply?’ The answer has to be, No. Its mere presence will render us components of some description."

rsbakker.wordpress.com/2016/07/18/the-death-of-wilson-how-the-academic-left-created-donald-trump/

"I belong to no tribe, at least not clearly. Because of this, I have Canadian friends who are, indeed, Trump supporters. And I’ve been whaling on them, asking questions, posing arguments, and they have been whaling back. Precisely because we are Canadian, the whole thing is theatre for us, allowing, I like to think, for a brand of honesty that rancour and defensiveness would muzzle otherwise.
When I get together with my academic friends, however, something very curious happens whenever I begin reporting these attitudes: I get interrupted. “But-but, that’s just idiotic/wrong/racist/sexist!” And that’s when I begin whaling on *them*, not because I don’t agree with their estimation, but because, unlike my academic confreres, *I don’t hold Trump supporters responsible*. I blame *them*, instead. Aren’t they the ‘critical thinkers’? What else did they think the ‘cretins’ would do? Magically seize upon their enlightened logic? Embrace the wisdom of those who openly call them fools?
Fact is, you’re the ones who jumped off the folk culture ship.
The Trump phenomenon falls into the wheelhouse of what has been an old concern of mine. For more than a decade now, I’ve been arguing that the social habitat of intellectual culture is collapsing, and that the persistence of the old institutional organisms is becoming more and more socially pernicious. Literature professors, visual artists, critical theorists, literary writers, cultural critics, intellectual historians and so on all continue acting and arguing as though this were the 20th century… as if they were actually solving something, instead of making matters worse."

>>Bakker
>>misogyny
>shitlib
rsbakker.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/confessions-of-a-demon/

"the function of moral reasoning is only incidentally epistemic, that it’s geared to managing perceptions, enforcing attitudes—and that this is the case no matter what the message. The moral reasoning of Islamic State radicals is the moral reasoning of Christian Fundamentalists is the moral reasoning of Feminists is the moral reasoning of Environmental Activists. Demons focus the attention, provide the organizing principle for some kind of recuperative or retributive action. "

"The fact the novels have managed to spark living examples of this device in action is something that I will always regard as my single greatest artistic triumph. My job, after all, is to problematize moral sensitivities, not pander to them.

What does Esmenet’s emancipation mean given the instrumental nature of its origins—given the fact of Kellhus? She’s my cipher—a painfully obvious one, you would think—for the crazy contradictions we’re witnessing today, with women making ever more social and economic inroads even as their sexual brutalization becomes the dominant form of mass entertainment. Kellhus strikes the shackles from her wrists… for what? So that she might be more fully enslaved?
How could this count as moral progress? How could emancipation, the ‘triumph of moral reason,’ so easily collapse into systematic exploitation?
If morality were a delusion, if ‘values’ were primarily a way to tackle complicated problems in the absence of any detailed information, you would expect morality to be ruthless the way it is ruthless, simply because it lacks the discriminatory powers to be anything but ‘fast and frugal.’"

Lots of words just to say cope.

Attached: Walking Bakker.png (838x983, 210.44K)

Not reading all of this shit just because you want to rationalize your support for a leftist. Just accept him for what he is, or fuck off back to r*ddit.

>Not reading all of this
Continue to live in a blissful world of clear black and white labels, then. Thinking is obviously not for you.

>your support for a leftist
web.archive.org/web/20170720065110/http://www.xenosystems.net/sentences-73/
Nick Land also likes him.
Would this high status right-wing figure's opinion convince a low-caste shudra, such as you? Because you obviously are merely what your betters tell you to be.

>Continue to live in a blissful world of clear black and white labels
I know the world isn’t black and white. Just not going to read all because I get the overwhelming feeling that you’re just coping and that Bakker is just a pretentious hack who acts contrarian despite having his politics and beliefs out of the open just to be smug.

>Bakker is just a pretentious hack who acts contrarian despite having his politics and beliefs out of the open just to be smug.
You're correct in your assertion by the way. Bakker is just your run of the mill leftist suffering from TDS.

Attached: Bakker suffering from TDS.png (624x303, 24.65K)

>You're correct in your assertion by the way
rsbakker.wordpress.com/2017/12/15/the-liars-paradox-naturalized/

The point of the examples on your pic, is just to be humourous.
The text isn't about Trump at all, the text is about being able to postulate abstract claims like "myopic", "in the dark", "no experience". As part of your human evolutionary 'truth-talk' tool-kit to solve contradictory claims, when they are suddenly noticed.