Feel free to add to this - but this is important.
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
This is more of a reading list for leftist thought.
Critical Thoery General
Isaiah Baker
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
angelfire.com
mega.nz
amazon.com
status451.com
splcenter.org
archive.is
youtube.com
my.mixtape.moe
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
archive.4plebs.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
twitter.com
Henry Smith
Read Kevin MacDonald - The Culture of Critique
The most important book on this topic.
Jack Gonzalez
It will be added to the general
Thomas Jackson
I'm actually reading some of Adorno's work right now.
Informative talk on the Frankfurt School:
youtube.com
Nicholas Johnson
Interesting. What cool shit did you learn?
Also, added for consideration.
Wyatt Kelly
Well for one, behind the fact he's a Marxist thinker there's actually a slightly conservative dimension to him which is revealed in his "elitist" view of culture, specifically with regards to his thoughts on music. He was after all a musician by training and probably would have went down the path of music had he not taken to philosophy.
Even though I would be on the right side of the fence politically, he's certainly a worthwhile thinker and does have a lot to say, particularly with his culture industry theory. I find a lot of what he has to say about consumer culture and how it erodes genuine culture very interesting.
Eli Diaz
youtube.com
youtube.com
I highly recommend that anyone interested in the Frankfurt School watch these videos as Mr. Lind et al express these concepts with greater clarity than I do. I'll summarize the main points below.
The way normal people arrive at truth is syllogistic logic. If x therefore y. You analyze your ideas to ensure that they aren't self-contradictory and that they jive with the evidence you know. Marxists use Hegelian Dialectics. Hegelian Dialectics work with a thesis (I say something), antithesis (you say something), leading to a synthesis (we reach a shared understanding). When you hear a Marxist mention dialect that's what he means.
Classical Marxism, sometimes called Economic Marxism, believed that only material conditions mattered and they approach this with dialectic. So they had "Dialectical Materialism". The theoretical goal of Classical Marxism was a classless society. In order to achieve a classless society it hoped to empower the working class (thesis) against the ruling class (antithesis) with a desired end state of no class differences (synthesis).
WWI proved to be a major challenge for Marxist theory. The workers of the world didn't unite and overthrow their rulers. They were patriotic and proudly fought for their kings and countries. This shouldn't have occurred. Additionally the first communist government in Hungary was overthrown after closing the Churches, destroying statues of old kings, and corrupting the youth through public education.
In the 1920s in Frankfurt a group of Marxists convened to discus why Marxism had failed and what they could do going forward. They realized that it failed in large part because people care about things beyond their material status. People care about race, ethnicity, religion, culture, family, and traditions. In order to create a society where Marxism could succeed these obstacles needed to be overcome.
Part 1.
Samuel Morris
In order to overcome these obstacles they decided to weaponize Hegelian Dialects against the culture. Declare an oppressed class (thesis), identify an oppressor (antithesis), then when the oppression is ended you win (synthesis). Feminism as described very clearly by Schmuley Firestone in "The Dialectics of Sex" the purpose of feminism was to empower women against men to create a genderless society. Racial movements seek to empower non-Whites against Whites to create a raceless society. Lather, rinse, repeat.
This is where Critical Theory comes into play. Critical Theory combines the Hegelian Dialectics with Freudian Psychoanalysis. The goal is to be critical to the existing power structure. You are critical against the system by forcing dialectical conflict with added on Freudianism. e. g.You empower homosexuals against heterosexuals to create a society where orientation doesn't matter, and anyone who opposes this is repressing homosexual desires.
The Cultural Marxism of the Frankfurt School creates a system intent of self-destruction. Unlimited conflict, demoralization, and confusion. It doesn't guarantee Marxism succeeds, but it destroys the systems that prevents Marxism.
Part 2.
Charles Phillips
This is utterly retarded because Marxism will never succeed because it will created a Canis canem type of society. I still can't believe it actually took traction.
Blake Flores
The most eye-opening book I have read.
Anthony Price
So this system creates entropy in previously stable systems. Why does the 'Frankfurt' School matter? They left Frankfurt when Hitler took power and resettled in New York City. Beginning in the 1930s they began to take over American institutions, especially academia. The social revolution that occurred in the 1960s was the effect of a generation coming of age with the values of Critical Theory. Some even chanted Adorno's name during demonstrations. They claimed to support racial equality, gender equality, peace, and free love. In truth it was anti-White, anti-family, anti-authoritarian, and effective. The deracinated hellhole that we live in now is in large part a result of this. The fighting never ends because there are always more causes (trans) or you can simply fabricate contentions (BLM and the pay gap).
The normie generally can go about his life without ever being truly aware of this. When he violates Critical Theory he is subjected to what we call "Political Correctness". He is seldom challenged on factual grounds, given that a commonsense analysis arrives at a reactionary conclusion, he is instead challenged on moral grounds. He is called a bigot, a racist, a sexist, a homophobe, an Islamophobe, ad infinitum. Threatened with becoming an unperson the normie learns to repeat and then internalize the nonsense. By believing the lie and repeating it he goes from being a victim to accomplice.
Jack Gray
Marxism can't work because classes are inevitable. Everything that it seeks to abolish is a natural state of human interaction and cannot be abolished.
Any falsehood will inevitably collapse, big lies collapse sooner than small lies. Enlightenment Liberalism began with a relatively small lie that the differences between European Catholics and Protestants didn't matter. That isn't true, but this lie doesn't crash until it is expanded to include other faiths. This came from the Peace of Westphalia and the desire to prevent more mass violence.
A big lie that collapsed rapidly was Lysenkoism. Lysenkoism applied Marxist Theory to agriculture. This led to immediate crop failures.
Gabriel Wright
Isaac Ortiz
Concise and eye-opening. Thank you for this.
Angel Baker
All in Sup Forums books
mega.nz
Add the link to the next OP
Jackson Gonzalez
If what you're adding the book to is a collection of good material to read, would you mind linking it?
Jackson Ross
I'm glad you enjoyed it.
Jeremiah Wood
fuckoff pinko shit cunts
all of you should stick to playing with crayons
Dominic Cox
amazon.com
status451.com
This book covers the political violence from the left from the 1960s to the 1980s. The second link is a long summary/book review.
Logan Sullivan
If you had bothered to read the thread you would have realized that none of us like Critical Theory.
Christian King
So what do you propose to fight it?
Turning Critical Theory on itself, and on Marxism all the while simultaneously building up something that is robust or antifragile to Critical Theory? Sure, that could work. The first part is easy, but the second part is harder. What is immune to, resistant to, or grows from being damaged by Critical Theory that we can use? Becoming degenerates is of course counter productive so "Become hedonists" isn't a valid answer to "what can we do to benefit from Critical Theory".
Christian Garcia
I didn't know about this folder.... thanks
Connor Williams
Personally I think we need to create a right wing Frankfurt School. We need to recognize that nationalism and traditionalism have failed. Identify what are the obstacles that prevent nationalism and traditionalism. When we identify those obstacles and seek to destroy them. Perhaps we can weaponize logic and create our "Constructive Theory", but I haven't really gotten that far.
Fight it from the bottom up. What we can do is first we need to reclaim ourselves. We need to know what part of our own values, beliefs, and behaviors are a result of Cultural Marxism and reform ourselves. These reclaimed people can form healthy traditional families and communities. Rebellion can be as simply as being healthy, proud, logical, and loving. That's the first part.
The second part is retaking or replacing their institutions. I propose hard right scholarship funds so we can create a new elite with a network. If I were a richfag I would have done this already.
Camden Sanders
Awesome, appreciate it!
Gabriel Wright
I'm here all week.
Aaron Jackson
What I wonder is why some of the more visible conservative voices don't regularly reference the Frankfurt school and the entire social Marxist apparatus. Its not something that can easily be discredited as right wing conspiracy theory. There should be a consistent narrative amongst the right that regularly and explicitly references this subversion while also deconstructing how it has sunk is claws into the culture.
Charles Reed
Excellent videos there. Thanks user.
Chase Gutierrez
It is very easily discredited. The way it is discredited is with 3 magic words.
>Anti-Semitic
>Conspiracy
>Theory
Factual refutations aren't important. There are no facts supporting that race and gender are social constructs, Islam is a religion of peace, LGBT people are sane, or any of the rest of the official story.
The difference between rightwingers that matter and the mainstream conservative is that mainstream conservatives are useless. Mainstream conservatives spend most of their time trying to appeal to their enemies, defending Cultural Marxism 1.0 against Cultural Marxism 2.0, and worshiping the constitution. There is nothing to conserve.
splcenter.org
archive.is
If it wasn't on CNN or Colbert its fake news.
Michael Ramirez
I'm glad you enjoyed them. William S. Lind mostly writes on military topics. He should be mandatory reading for everyone on our side.
John Foster
Here's a screencap of two posts from a few days ago by an Australian user on the subject of Richfags and the funding of movements. The rest of the thread was absolute garbage but this guys posts were important.
On the subject of your "Constructive Theory", might I suggest Jung? I know next to nothing about the ins and outs of psychoanalysis but I had always thought that Jung was a sort of antithesis to Freud. If we're interested in creating a theoretical system to build people up instead of tear them down, it would make sense to use Freud's opposite to do so.
Nathan Diaz
It all started with Gramsci. He knew that the proletariat revolution would never happen in 1st world countries so the goal new proletariat now was the minorities - gays, women, non-europeans. Absolutely everyone needs to watch this video.
youtube.com
Andrew Miller
I'll have to check out Jung.
We should consider making a controlled opposition ideology that is superficially leftist, but ultimately capitulates to our worldview after a token resistance. Neo-conservatism is an excellent model of controlled opposition.
Josiah Clark
As feminism was a big success for critical theory/cultural marxism and pretty much every one knows at least one women start with them. All women with male children can be targeted with this book. Start to sow seeds of doubt. Think Yuri Bezmenov. Change will take more than one generation now.
Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture
The second book 'Legalizing Misandry' is in the Sup Forums books mega link here
James Watson
Easton Cruz
>The end of the sex-class system must mean the end of the biological family, that is, the end of women's biological reproductive role through artificial means of gestation. Love between the sexes will remain, for it becomes oppressive only when joined to the reproductive function. The biological family turns sexual love into a tool of oppression. Within it, women give their love to men, thus inspiring the latter to greater cultural creativity, and providing the former with an emotional identity of the sort denied them in the larger world. Yet men, as a result of the Oedipus complex and the incest taboo, are unable to love: they must degrade the women they make love to, in order to distinguish them from the mother, the first and forbidden love object. They cannot simultaneously respect and be sexually attracted to women.
>This is why the "sexual revolution" has not meant liberation for women, who are still bound by the double standard and the need to combine love and sexuality. By eliminating the biological family and the incest taboo, the feminist revolution will enlarge the opportunity for real heterosexual love, as well as legitimating every other type of voluntary sexual relationship'
Dont know about anyone else, but to me this is fucking sinister and not a society I want my children and grand children living in
John Lee
>Dont know about anyone else, but to me this is fucking sinister and not a society I want my children and grand children living in
What a reactionary thought comrade I think you need to be hanged by the people's court.
Michael White
>You're just an incestophobe. Love wins bigot!
5 years, 10 years, 15 years? Whenever this happens the mainstream conservatives will wheel out a based queer to tell them they're wrong.
Asher Thompson
>conservatives
They bring shame to conservaitsm desu.
Blake White
If only conservatism referred to Sam Francis, William S. Lind, and Enoch Powell instead of of all of these e-celebs and Israel firsters.
Christian Lewis
Then I'll take as many cunts with me as I can
Lincoln Morales
>This is where Critical Theory comes into play. Critical Theory combines the Hegelian Dialectics with Freudian Psychoanalysis. The goal is to be critical to the existing power structure. You are critical against the system by forcing dialectical conflict with added on Freudianism. e. g.You empower homosexuals against heterosexuals to create a society where orientation doesn't matter, and anyone who opposes this is repressing homosexual desires.
AHA! This is why resisting is a called "phobe". Homo, transo, islamo...
Liam Gonzalez
Don't forget this guy:
Charles Rogers
...
Isaiah Price
don't take this the wrong way, user, but why should one person, such as Jeff Bezos, have so much wealth when there are so many poor? I agree with everything you have written and understand postmodernism and critical theory, but don't you think that the disparity in wealth is a problem? Why shouldn't Amazon pay it's workers a living wage? Why should they be able to dodge taxes because of the power of one man?
Blake Ramirez
bump
Connor Price
Bump
Brayden Reed
Everything that has risen from critical theory/cultural marxism has done nothing to counter the dispairity between rich and poor. We have culturally acceptable misandry, tranny rights, gay rights, open disrimination against whites and the influx of masses of immigrants who refuse to intergrate into the western culture. Cultural suicide and white racial genocide is in full swing but the wealth is continually collecting in the hands of fewer and fewer elite. Obviously the social revolution of tolerance and multiculturalism is benefiting not the masses but a select few. It is all a con.
What was your point?
Asher Jenkins
Bumping....
Jason Anderson
We desperately need a counter to Marxist theory. Right-wingers are currently forced to choose between ideas that are too easily dismissed as conspiracy theories, or religious texts. We need something concrete and logical that follows facts.
I like the sounds of a "constructive" theory.
Mason Rogers
If you want a true red pill on critical theory, then throw Kevin MacDonald aside and read Reinhart Koselleck's "Critique and Crisis". This is a historiographical red pill
Tyler Brooks
Everything you need to know about this
>archive.4plebs.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
just read a little you'll get the jyst. a bunch of victimized jews that rose to levels of academic influence and were hell bent on making sure nationalism never rises again. the best way to do it is destroying the people's pride in themselves, in their countries, and in their societies.
Adam Martinez
Inequality is natural and therefore inevitable. Amazon specifically has never turned a profit and remains in business by paying off loans with loans. I have no issue with there being an elite. An illegitimate elite is the problem. The elite needs to understand noblesse oblige and the workers need to be productive and loyal. Loyalty is a two way street.
The bigger issue here is the Managerial Revolution. The Bourgeois elite founded the US. Their values were broad principles, ie the Bill of Rights. They had both ownership and control. Their traditional power centers were the business owner-operator, the middle class worker, and the military and police.
Beginning with the Great Depression the Managerial Elite took power. Their values were procedure, specific to a situation like Federal Regulations. They separated ownership from control. You own the farm, but I run it for you. The problem is a manager is valued by the amount of complexity he manages. So I would have an incentive to introduce complexity where none existed because it would allow me to gain value while hiring more managers. A Chief Diversity Officer is a perfect example of this. Their power centers are the managerial class (like Mr Bezos), the welfare recipient class, and the bureaucracy. If you ever wondered why the very rich and very poor vote for centre-left parties in the west this is why.
Amazon is an incredibly complex business that requires many echelons of managers. Bezos also owns the Washington Post, which also doesn't turn a profit, to spread the news he wants spread. He benefits from this complex interrelationship and the welfare state being able to subsidize his (and his friends') underpaid workers.
Under the old Bourgeois system it wasn't perfect, but Amazon couldn't work anyway.
Sam Francis and James Burnham extensively explored the Managerial Revolution and its consequences.
Luis Long
Bumping
Kevin Sullivan
nice try with your (((critical theory))) shilling on here, it's obvious to us all that youre leftypol shills
get the fuck off my board communist faggots
Camden Richardson
I find the best way to make my extreme points is to begin in a broad philosophical discussion. I begin by noting that the first value difference between the left and the right is the issue of objective and subjective reality. Then introduce this idea with something that isn't emotionally charged, I like height.
Objectively I'm 5'6", but subjectively I am shorter/taller than the person I'm talking to. I then tell them the right winger is more interested that I'm 5'6", but the left winger will care who is taller.
Then escalate responsibly. If the person is sensitive bring up art. Right wingers like objective standards of beauty, whereas leftists enjoy subjective art. If the person isn't sensitive bring up Islam. A right winger says Islam is bad, while a leftist compares to Christianity. I then make the point that Islam is objectively bad on several measures before defending Christianity. The point to drive home is objective reality.
I also like to reference studies like Jared Taylor's Color of Crime, Alternative Hypothesis, Robert Putnam's studies, and things in that vein to support the nationalist/traditionalist value system with hard data. Robert Putnam is a liberal who hated his study, so that adds some legitimacy.
I have had some success with this. I have had 2 liberals tell me that while they agreed with my facts on race realism that they couldn't follow it on moral grounds. I've yet to crack that nut, but I'll grill them later.
The takeaways I have are to calmly explain these issues, do so without malice, and try your best to walk someone to a conclusion rather than spell it out for them.
Nathaniel Sullivan
...
Christian Jones
>Turning Critical Theory on itself
I think this is already happened. If the goal was to create genderless and raceless society then the left failed miserably because the minorities became so "empowered" that their issues became the most important issue of politics. It also led to the rise of this new right that's way more radical than mainstream right.
The "real" marxist old school left is butthurt 24/7 about the current state of debate because it has all been reduced to identity politics and the class has became largely irrelevant. This is victory for crony capitalism we're living under but unfortunately not for us.
I am honestly convinced that the left attracted so many undesirables (i.e. double digit IQ niggers or suicidal trannies) that it has became retarded and completely unable to institute marxism anymore.
Lucas Hernandez
Found a copy at libgen but its pretty badly rendered. Do you have a link to a decent copy user?
Anthony Cook
Your method sounds very compelling user. Keep up the good work.
Michael Lewis
Thank you. I plan on doing more going forward.
Adrian Rodriguez
Bumping
Connor Myers
The right likes to build policy around human nature. The left likes to build human nature around policy.
Zachary Cook
Bump
Lucas Moore
Herbert Marcuse (Frankfurt School) interview with first-rate philosopher and former BBC presenter Bryan Magee. There's no ambiguity at all about the fact that the goal was to keep Marxism alive by re-interpreting it in cultural terms: youtube.com
Nolan Wright
How to bring about communism, infiltrate and destroy the institutional pillars that uphold a free capitalist society; family, media, education, government, religion; let's see, they already have destroyed family, they now controlled colleges and universities and the mainstream media, the pope is a communist, prods have become weak socialists and are slowly bleeding into politics.
The time when the communists make their move is nigh, soon it will be time to fight or die for your children's future, be ready counter revolutionaries, they will destroy us all.