not sure how you betray the revolution ironically but im sure ill figure it out
Edited by ilmdge ()
tpaine posted:did you fuckers really start talking about breaking bad
your right. what did you guys think of the real rhizzone show, Girls season 2?
TOP TEN THINGS TPAINE SAID TODAY:
...1. Make it isopropyl.
ilmdge posted:gender experiment
babyfinland posted:tpaine i find your posting problematic and anthrophobic. however, the primary problem with your posts is that they are not marxist. by consistently erasing class, you perpetuate a reactionary liberal individualism and nihilism against the working class that represses revolutionary potential of the masses, whom are dying all the time every day everywhere and its so terrible.
this got 9 upvotes but im pretty sure half of those people cant tell that its a sarcastic word salad
babyfinland posted:babyfinland posted:tpaine i find your posting problematic and anthrophobic. however, the primary problem with your posts is that they are not marxist. by consistently erasing class, you perpetuate a reactionary liberal individualism and nihilism against the working class that represses revolutionary potential of the masses, whom are dying all the time every day everywhere and its so terrible.
this got 9 upvotes but im pretty sure half of those people cant tell that its a sarcastic word salad
why would it be different than all of your other posts
babyhueypnewton posted:gyrofry posted:did yall see the last breaking bad
holky fuckif you don't unconditionally support Walter White against the racist police of AmeriKKKa you're a counter-revolutionary.
i can't tell which is supposed to be ironic here the talking about breaking bad or spelling america with K's
tomas: you can't handle the sarcasm
AmericanNazbro posted:tom, i agree with you that people who treat marxism as religious dogma are morons but there is some truth to the notion when people say "x was not analyzed in a Marxist manner" in the sense that the idea behind marxism is to have a lens and methodology for material analysis rather than arriving at a ideological presupposition and trying to prove that position in reverse. granted, most marxists do the latter so whatever
shut your face woman
babyfinland posted:babyfinland posted:tpaine i find your posting problematic and anthrophobic. however, the primary problem with your posts is that they are not marxist. by consistently erasing class, you perpetuate a reactionary liberal individualism and nihilism against the working class that represses revolutionary potential of the masses, whom are dying all the time every day everywhere and its so terrible.
this got 9 upvotes but im pretty sure half of those people cant tell that its a sarcastic word salad
you have a pretty low opinion of people. been spending too mucgh time with tpaine lately?
ilmdge posted:babyfinland posted:babyfinland posted:tpaine i find your posting problematic and anthrophobic. however, the primary problem with your posts is that they are not marxist. by consistently erasing class, you perpetuate a reactionary liberal individualism and nihilism against the working class that represses revolutionary potential of the masses, whom are dying all the time every day everywhere and its so terrible.
this got 9 upvotes but im pretty sure half of those people cant tell that its a sarcastic word salad
you have a pretty low opinion of people. been spending too mucgh time with tpaine lately?
look at the people who upvoted it and tell me if you see someone that makes you go lol
AmericanNazbro posted:tom, i agree with you that people who treat marxism as religious dogma are morons but there is some truth to the notion when people say "x was not analyzed in a Marxist manner" in the sense that the idea behind marxism is to have a lens and methodology for material analysis rather than arriving at a ideological presupposition and trying to prove that position in reverse. granted, most marxists do the latter so whatever
what are you even talking about here. it is dumb and addressed to me for some reason
babyfinland posted:AmericanNazbro posted:tom, i agree with you that people who treat marxism as religious dogma are morons but there is some truth to the notion when people say "x was not analyzed in a Marxist manner" in the sense that the idea behind marxism is to have a lens and methodology for material analysis rather than arriving at a ideological presupposition and trying to prove that position in reverse. granted, most marxists do the latter so whatever
what are you even talking about here. it is dumb and addressed to me for some reason
babyfinland posted:ilmdge posted:babyfinland posted:babyfinland posted:tpaine i find your posting problematic and anthrophobic. however, the primary problem with your posts is that they are not marxist. by consistently erasing class, you perpetuate a reactionary liberal individualism and nihilism against the working class that represses revolutionary potential of the masses, whom are dying all the time every day everywhere and its so terrible.
this got 9 upvotes but im pretty sure half of those people cant tell that its a sarcastic word salad
you have a pretty low opinion of people. been spending too mucgh time with tpaine lately?
look at the people who upvoted it and tell me if you see someone that makes you go lol
my friend hubert is just being a good sport. 5 minutes later he made that post saying you're counter-revolutionary if you don't unconditionally support walter white, dude knows how to be self-deprecating. anyway i guess it's funnier if you imagine him the way y'all see him
ilmdge posted:babyfinland posted:ilmdge posted:babyfinland posted:babyfinland posted:tpaine i find your posting problematic and anthrophobic. however, the primary problem with your posts is that they are not marxist. by consistently erasing class, you perpetuate a reactionary liberal individualism and nihilism against the working class that represses revolutionary potential of the masses, whom are dying all the time every day everywhere and its so terrible.
this got 9 upvotes but im pretty sure half of those people cant tell that its a sarcastic word salad
you have a pretty low opinion of people. been spending too mucgh time with tpaine lately?
look at the people who upvoted it and tell me if you see someone that makes you go lol
my friend hubert is just being a good sport. 5 minutes later he made that post saying you're counter-revolutionary if you don't unconditionally support walter white, dude knows how to be self-deprecating. anyway i guess it's funnier if you imagine him the way y'all see him
you're both dumb as dog shit lol
An all-too-familiar scene was enacted on the campus of Swarthmore College during a meeting on May 4 to discuss demands by student activists for the college to divest itself of its investments in companies that deal in fossil fuels. As a speaker was beginning a presentation to show how many millions of dollars such a disinvestment would cost the college, student activists invaded the meeting, seized the microphone, and shouted down a student who rose in the audience to object.
Although there were professors and administrators in the room — including the college president — apparently nobody had the guts to put a stop to these storm-trooper tactics. Nor is it likely that there will be any punishment of those who put their own desires above the rights of others. On the contrary, these students went on to demand mandatory campus “teach-ins,” and the administration caved on that demand. Among their other demands are that courses on ethnic studies, and on gender and sexuality, be made a requirement for graduation.
Just what is it that academics have to fear if they stand up for common decency, instead of letting campus barbarians run amok? At a prestigious college like Swarthmore, every student who trampled on other people’s rights could be expelled and there would be plenty of prospective students available to take their places. Although colleges and universities across the country have been giving in to storm-trooper tactics ever since the nationwide campus disruptions of the 1960s, not all have. Back in the 1960s, the University of Chicago was a rare exception. As Professor George J. Stigler, a Nobel Prize–winning economist, put it in his memoirs, “our faculty united behind the expulsion of a large number of young barbarians.”
The sky did not fall. There was no bloodbath. The University of Chicago was in fact spared some of the worst nonsense that more compliant institutions were permanently saddled with in the years that followed as a result of their failure of nerve in the ’60s. When the nationwide campus disruptions and violence of the 1960s gave way to quieter times in the 1970s, many academics congratulated themselves on having restored peace. But it was the peace of surrender.
Creating whole departments of ethnic, gender, and other “studies” was part of the price of academic peace. All too often, these “studies” are about propaganda rather than serious education. Academic campuses have become among the least free places in America. “Speech codes,” vaguely worded but zealously applied to those who dare to say anything that is not politically correct, have become the norm. Few professors would dare to publish research or teach a course debunking the claims made in various ethnic, gender, or other “studies” courses.
Why did all this happen? Partly because of the lure of the path of least resistance, especially to academic administrators and faculty. But there was no such widespread surrender to every noisy and belligerent group of student activists prior to the 1960s. Moreover, the example of the University of Chicago showed that surrender was not inevitable.
The cost of resistance to the campus barbarians may not have been the only factor. Resistance requires a sense that there is something worth defending. But decades of dumbed-down education have produced people with no sense of the importance of a moral framework within which freedom and civil discourse can flourish. Without a moral framework, there is nothing left but immediate self-indulgence by some and the path of least resistance by others. Neither can sustain a free society. Disruptive activists indulge their egos in the name of idealism and others cave rather than fight.
It’s not just academics who won’t defend decency. Trustees could fire college presidents who cave in to storm-trooper tactics. Donors could stop donating to institutions that have sold out their principles to appease the campus barbarians. But when nobody is willing to defend civilized standards, the barbarians win.
Whether on college campuses or among nations on the world stage, if the battle comes down to the wimps versus the barbarians, the barbarians are bound to win.
babyfinland posted:ilmdge posted:babyfinland posted:ilmdge posted:babyfinland posted:babyfinland posted:tpaine i find your posting problematic and anthrophobic. however, the primary problem with your posts is that they are not marxist. by consistently erasing class, you perpetuate a reactionary liberal individualism and nihilism against the working class that represses revolutionary potential of the masses, whom are dying all the time every day everywhere and its so terrible.
this got 9 upvotes but im pretty sure half of those people cant tell that its a sarcastic word salad
you have a pretty low opinion of people. been spending too mucgh time with tpaine lately?
look at the people who upvoted it and tell me if you see someone that makes you go lol
my friend hubert is just being a good sport. 5 minutes later he made that post saying you're counter-revolutionary if you don't unconditionally support walter white, dude knows how to be self-deprecating. anyway i guess it's funnier if you imagine him the way y'all see him
you're both dumb as dog shit lol
tha'ts what you think about everyone
AmericanNazbro posted:babyfinland posted:AmericanNazbro posted:tom, i agree with you that people who treat marxism as religious dogma are morons but there is some truth to the notion when people say "x was not analyzed in a Marxist manner" in the sense that the idea behind marxism is to have a lens and methodology for material analysis rather than arriving at a ideological presupposition and trying to prove that position in reverse. granted, most marxists do the latter so whatever
what are you even talking about here. it is dumb and addressed to me for some reason
epic coach grundlesworthy moment
babyfinland posted:baby huey wrote this article:
An all-too-familiar scene was enacted on the campus of Swarthmore College during a meeting on May 4 to discuss demands by student activists for the college to divest itself of its investments in companies that deal in fossil fuels. As a speaker was beginning a presentation to show how many millions of dollars such a disinvestment would cost the college, student activists invaded the meeting, seized the microphone, and shouted down a student who rose in the audience to object.
Although there were professors and administrators in the room — including the college president — apparently nobody had the guts to put a stop to these storm-trooper tactics. Nor is it likely that there will be any punishment of those who put their own desires above the rights of others. On the contrary, these students went on to demand mandatory campus “teach-ins,” and the administration caved on that demand. Among their other demands are that courses on ethnic studies, and on gender and sexuality, be made a requirement for graduation.
Just what is it that academics have to fear if they stand up for common decency, instead of letting campus barbarians run amok? At a prestigious college like Swarthmore, every student who trampled on other people’s rights could be expelled and there would be plenty of prospective students available to take their places. Although colleges and universities across the country have been giving in to storm-trooper tactics ever since the nationwide campus disruptions of the 1960s, not all have. Back in the 1960s, the University of Chicago was a rare exception. As Professor George J. Stigler, a Nobel Prize–winning economist, put it in his memoirs, “our faculty united behind the expulsion of a large number of young barbarians.”
The sky did not fall. There was no bloodbath. The University of Chicago was in fact spared some of the worst nonsense that more compliant institutions were permanently saddled with in the years that followed as a result of their failure of nerve in the ’60s. When the nationwide campus disruptions and violence of the 1960s gave way to quieter times in the 1970s, many academics congratulated themselves on having restored peace. But it was the peace of surrender.
Creating whole departments of ethnic, gender, and other “studies” was part of the price of academic peace. All too often, these “studies” are about propaganda rather than serious education. Academic campuses have become among the least free places in America. “Speech codes,” vaguely worded but zealously applied to those who dare to say anything that is not politically correct, have become the norm. Few professors would dare to publish research or teach a course debunking the claims made in various ethnic, gender, or other “studies” courses.
Why did all this happen? Partly because of the lure of the path of least resistance, especially to academic administrators and faculty. But there was no such widespread surrender to every noisy and belligerent group of student activists prior to the 1960s. Moreover, the example of the University of Chicago showed that surrender was not inevitable.
The cost of resistance to the campus barbarians may not have been the only factor. Resistance requires a sense that there is something worth defending. But decades of dumbed-down education have produced people with no sense of the importance of a moral framework within which freedom and civil discourse can flourish. Without a moral framework, there is nothing left but immediate self-indulgence by some and the path of least resistance by others. Neither can sustain a free society. Disruptive activists indulge their egos in the name of idealism and others cave rather than fight.
It’s not just academics who won’t defend decency. Trustees could fire college presidents who cave in to storm-trooper tactics. Donors could stop donating to institutions that have sold out their principles to appease the campus barbarians. But when nobody is willing to defend civilized standards, the barbarians win.
Whether on college campuses or among nations on the world stage, if the battle comes down to the wimps versus the barbarians, the barbarians are bound to win.
It's a good article, he should be proud
tpaine posted:also i refuse to believe it's just florida and will go to my grave in this bog believing that people telling me to leave the state are just playing a joke on me and are waiting giddily for me to pack everything up and move my life across the us only to be greeted by same mass of idiot shit and laugh at me and my misplaced trust and play horns.aiff and maybe knock me over and steal my stuff (not falling for that one again, nice bro!)
you know how literally everyone in the country and vast portions of the rest of the world look upon florida with confusion and disgust? how they all think its a fetid swamp full of barely human creatures surrounded by a thin coastal layer of despicable wealthy and elderly white people? how its objectively worse than nearly every other place, including some that are uninhabitable to mankind? how some people in the other parts of the country legitimately enjoy their existence? that isnt some massive fake-moon-landing-sized trick were all playing on you tponimus. its just How It Is
babyhueypnewton posted:you realize Gus was a businessman under Pinochet and represents pure capitalism, uninhibited by liberal distaste for violence or morality. that walter white kills him only means he takes his place. walter white represents the american dream, what makes him a villain is the american dream is only allowed for stereotypes of mexicans, dumb wanna-be gangsters, and CIA dictators and comprador capitalists who can do the vicious work that America refuses to.
the creators say BB is the story of 'a white bread suburban father becoming scarface' but it appears they haven't watched scarface or have no idea why it's popular. if Tony Montana is a parody of the pure capitalism, walter white is a parody of the liberal welfare state, a rich, intelligent, white man who refuses to put the violence of capitalism out of mind and leave it to POC.
you make some very good points. I think ultimately, if Walter White is anything, hes a poster child for the necessity of socialized health care and increased teachers salaries in America
VoxNihili posted:tpaine just leave florida. maybe head up to mississippi or another state that is truly ripe for organization
tpaine come to mississippi. we passed that law here so now you can drink high gravity beers while jamming Costello and shooting guns in time to prog rock drumbeats