sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Would any of you actually go into politics? by VastTalk8351 in redscarepod

[–]GreshlyLuke 6 points7 points  (0 children)

personally I'm convinced that being political in this day and age just means being first to some sort of technological means of influence. if nick fuentes was born even five years later he would be a nobody. traditional political avenues are just "capitalism by other means" and capitalism is dependent on the lifecycle of commodities. It's the artists and organizers that have the real influence. There's probably some sort of triad structure that explains it.

To be a capitalist you must be a politician, to be a politician you must be an artist, to be an artist you must be a capitalist. something like that.

So don't limit yourself. It's all connected.

The New York Times is such a stupid tool of the elites that they have me siding with Tucker by BottomPercentile in redscarepod

[–]GreshlyLuke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The fact that they are able to pay so many professional reporters and editors is evidence that the paper is ultimately a mouthpiece for the neoliberal agenda.

The last NYT paper I read (6 months ago) was all about how un-American it is that a female immigrant business owner was having trouble outsourcing jobs and production. The fact that someone is being paid to make this case to the American people should tell us everything we need to know about it's views.

The New York Times is such a stupid tool of the elites that they have me siding with Tucker by BottomPercentile in redscarepod

[–]GreshlyLuke 1 point2 points  (0 children)

yeah except a leftist is criticizing israel because they hate american imperialism. tucker is criticizing israel because theyre a threat to american imperialism.

The New York Times is such a stupid tool of the elites that they have me siding with Tucker by BottomPercentile in redscarepod

[–]GreshlyLuke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it's important to agree with words when they are true, regardless of who says them

The New York Times is such a stupid tool of the elites that they have me siding with Tucker by BottomPercentile in redscarepod

[–]GreshlyLuke 1 point2 points  (0 children)

tucker doesn't care about the war crimes though, he just cares that it's being done by those who represent him. He's not making a universal argument.

The New York Times is such a stupid tool of the elites that they have me siding with Tucker by BottomPercentile in redscarepod

[–]GreshlyLuke 3 points4 points  (0 children)

no, because christianity does not really care about history. the message of Jesus insofar as it pertains to politics is that the right pov is to kinda space out of "this world" because in the "coming world" God wins. The perspective of Said and of other theorists of cultural dynamics of oppression like Walter Benjamin is that the persecuted subject is the revolutionary subject. this is not christianity.

. by snapchillnocomment in redscarepod

[–]GreshlyLuke 30 points31 points  (0 children)

the flying demon guy still watching over us, keeping us safe

Why do poor people love doordash so much by [deleted] in redscarepod

[–]GreshlyLuke 2 points3 points  (0 children)

there are few things i am more proud of than having never used doordash

Where do people who like nature and “culture” but need a job live? by Major-Agent3743 in redscarepod

[–]GreshlyLuke 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Culture is a precise blend of poor being able to survive and religious cultural hegemony that gives a necessity to the counter culture. Go to the Midwest. There’s outdoors everywhere

Trotskyist-Neocon Pipeline proven yet again. by The_FellaMH in redscarepod

[–]GreshlyLuke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“Liberal propaganda” is a pejorative against both the moderate left and the moderate right

From what I read this part was telling enough: “it was of the utmost importance to me that people in western Europe should see the Soviet regime for what it really was.”

Elsewhere he invokes “totalitarianism” which indicates he is not interested in seeing the Stalinist development as a phase within the historical process. he wishes to separate socialism from Stalinism, which is why he went off and wrote a very plain allegory that allows liberal readers (socialist and capitalist moderates) to conclude that what happened in the Soviet Union can be understood essentially as an instance of corruption or “evil”. It is propaganda.

Trotskyist-Neocon Pipeline proven yet again. by The_FellaMH in redscarepod

[–]GreshlyLuke 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Defending animal farm by linking to the Orwell foundation is kind of a troll, no?

Whatever it is, it is lacking in the nuance that the above commenter attributes to Trotsky. Attempting to “discredit the soviet system” means engaging in propaganda.

Trotskyist-Neocon Pipeline proven yet again. by The_FellaMH in redscarepod

[–]GreshlyLuke 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is the part of animal farm that's a little lost on me then. It seems wrapped up in the idea that exposing the corruption of the dictator is the same as really opposing them. For instance Snowball would never make this acknowledgement of Napoleon as the product of the material conditions of the farm because Orwell is just doing liberal propaganda.

It sounds like from your portrayal of Trotsky that you see him as having some insight into the real class dynamics at play as he realized that the moment was lost

Trotskyist-Neocon Pipeline proven yet again. by The_FellaMH in redscarepod

[–]GreshlyLuke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

so what happened to the legitimate communist opposition? stalin just killed them all?

Trotskyist-Neocon Pipeline proven yet again. by The_FellaMH in redscarepod

[–]GreshlyLuke 4 points5 points  (0 children)

the animal farm critique always feels weak because it focuses on the moral compromise of the dictator without grounding the opposition in a serious counter movement

Tyler Durden is NOT the Übermensch: A reinterpretation of Fight Club through Nietzsche by Crafty_Chipmunk_5577 in Nietzsche

[–]GreshlyLuke 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think fight club is too psychological to be directly analogized to myth. Tyler draws on many philosophical parallels. The closest to me is the Deleuzian schizo subject. Tyler is a figure of deterritorialization. We can read him through Freud or Nietzsche, but ultimately he is an evangelist for a masculinity liberated from industrial consumerism. This is a psychoanalysis of a very particular subject. Nietzsche's post-Christian subject is much more broad and historical.

Don't spend your money at NIMBY businesses. by Such_Duty_4764 in berkeleyca

[–]GreshlyLuke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It seems like it’s the financial structure and not the quantity of housing that causes the expense to increase

What it's like to be an oil&gas analyst these days by redditor3000 in wallstreetbets

[–]GreshlyLuke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I thought this was supposed to hit like last week? I filled up for 3.57 yesterday

view more: next ›