BF2S Forums BF3s Book Club

Jay wrote:

Uzique wrote:

nice backpedal, varegg. real nice. you were clearly talking about marx (macbeth had already had a to-and-fro on the subject with kmar). you said the book isn't worth reading because it was, quote, "written 200 years ago". marxism is the single biggest idea to possibly happen in the history of ideas. i know all the political anti-marxists will hate a statement like that, but... really. nothing has had such an effect on ideology, on sociology, on art and aesthetics, and on philosophy as the materialist marxian take on hegelian dialectics. the biggest philosopher up until marx was hegel, and marx carried it on. marxism is the single biggest intellectual influence on university campuses all over the world-- and i'm not just talking about the political or ideological elements of it, i.e. i'm not stating everyone on college campuses is wearing a beret and waving a red flag. there's far more to marxist thought than that; indeed, marxist thought spawns an entire version of world history and a reinvigorates a system of philosophical thinking (dialectics) that is relevant and used every day in every single department. so try again. your back pedal is painful. you look dumb. go read marx, comrade.

Speak for yourself Uzi. The more I read up on Marx, the more I recognize the root of pretty much everything you say you believe here. You've been as brainwashed as any good Christian soldier. I feel sorry for you.

lmao what are you talking about? i have no marxist beliefs. i just recognize that marxist theory is the most influential theory in philosophy/the intellectual world/academia. i am in academia, jay. are you? no. so what would you know of it? a few marxist pop books you're reading (wtg goodreads). ask any university professor at any university from any background on the political spectrum and they will tell you that the 20th century was the century of marxist theory and marxist artistic/literary criticism. that's just the way it is. name the biggest cultural theorists of the 20th century? the biggest, most well-known serious academics? the true powerhouses that every academic department will cite? people like fredric jameson. all have written and studied marxism extensively. are they all necessarily members of maoist revolutionary parties? no. like i said, you're falling into the same trap as varegg - assuming that political theory and praxis are the be-all-and-end-all of marxism. it's an idea and a philosophy, more than anything else. and it has completely defined the 19th and 20th centuries... positively and negatively. am i a marxist? you'd have to be a fucking moron to accuse me of being a marxist just because i'm aware of its huge progressivist and revolutionary avant-garde influence in academia.

and yeah my opinions on everything are just regurgitated marx lmao. you're really enjoying that current title of yours, huh? you can say what you like about me jay (and it is categorically wrong; for a start all of my favourite and most revered cultural theorists are at the complete other end of the scale to marxism, socio-politically) but one thing that is universally true for you, with delicious irony, is this: whatever book you are reading or have read recently, YOU will regurgitate wholesale. it colours your entire posting habits. that hegel thread? what a laugh. your political see-sawing in d&st over the years at the end of the day was the consequence of you going through an amazon 'political science for duimbies' list, starting at ayn rand and moving through the phases as you go like some groupie cheerleader. then you pass yourself off as some intellectual powerhouse here, rofl. you are serially insecure about academia, as we have seen time and time again here where you oscillate between outright hating and condemning it for "being useless" and alternatively valorize it in your showy d&st soliloquies-to-self. it's hilarious that you then have the confidence to say i am completely mindwashed by whatever i read (here's a protip: i get through about 2-3 cultural theory books a week, minimum, and i haven't read marx since my second-year, where it was taught as a mandatory part of literary theory-- and rightly so). the only person seeing the texts he reads everywhere in real life as soon as he puts them down is you, dr. jay galt, phd.

have everyone else's thoughts on the matter, too, may as well continue whilst you're fucking 100% wrong.

“     A knowledge of the writings of Marx and Engels is virtually indispensable to an educated person in our time....For classical Marxism...has profoundly affected ideas about history, society, economics, culture and politics; indeed, about the nature of social inquire itself...Not to be well grounded in the writings of Marx and Engels is to be insufficiently attuned to modern thought, and self-excluded to a degree from the continuing debate by which most contemporary societies live insofar as their members are free and able to discuss the vital issues.     ”
     
— Robert C. Tucker, The Marx-Engels Reader, 1978[146]

Marx has widely been thought of as one of the most influential thinkers in history, who has had a significant influence on both world politics and intellectual thought.[7] Marx's biographer Francis Wheen considered the "history of the twentieth century" to be "Marx's legacy",[147] whilst Australian philosopher Peter Singer believed that Marx's impact could be compared with that of the founders of the two major world religions, Jesus Christ and Muhammad.[148] Singer noted that "Marx's ideas brought about modern sociology, transformed the study of history, and profoundly affected philosophy, literature and the arts."[148] Stokes said that Marx's ideas led to him becoming "the darling of both European and American intellectuals up until the 1960s",[149] and have influenced a wide variety of disciplines, including archaeology, anthropology,[150] media studies,[151] political science, theater, history, sociological theory, cultural studies, education, economics, geography, literary criticism, aesthetics, critical psychology, and philosophy.[152]

In July 2005, 27.9% of listeners in a BBC Radio 4 series In Our Time poll selected Marx as their favorite thinker.[153]

The reasons for Marx's widespread influence revolve around his ethical message; a "morally empowering language of critique" against the dominant capitalist society.[7] No other body of work was so relevant to the modern times, and at the same time, so outspoken about the need for change.[7] In the political realm, Marx's ideas led to the establishment of governments using Marxist thought to replace capitalism with communism or socialism (or augment it with market socialism) across much of the world, whilst his intellectual thought has heavily influenced the academic study of the humanities and the arts.

hey jay, perhaps stop playing the amateur academic when you're so hopelessly shit at it? you look like a contrived insecure moron.

that goes to you, too, varegg. you can be wrong sometimes! even though you're older than me and infinitely more wise! i'm the one studying at a research-heavy academic institution, interested in pursuing a career in academia. i think i know more about the history of 'big ideas' than you. sorry! and also sorry for not having any red armbands or large flags draped in my room! i know i'm an awful disappointment.

Did I ever say that he was worthless to read? No. Most of academia was heavily influenced by Marx over the past century, so yes, he's rather difficult to escape.

All I was saying is that as I read more, the more I recognize things that you have said on this forum. I'm like 'Hey, uzique said that very same thing'.

Does this sound familiar? "through life long repetition of one and the same trivial operation has been reduced to the merest fragment of a man" that's pretty much your anti real work rant verbatim.

What about this? the second half "and must in a future society be replaced by the fully developed individual who is given free scope to his own natural and acquired powers". which is pretty much your pro academia fuck everything else rant.

It oozes out of you on every topic. So please, come down off your high horse, you're not nearly as smart as you want everyone to think you are.

edit - Oh, and that 'amazon pop' you put down was written by one of the greatest economists since Friedman. Yeah, any book that isn't on an academic required reading list is 'amazon pop'. Turd.

Last edited by Jay (2012-01-04 07:45:20)

lmao. yeah valuing academia and theoria is an exclusively marxist trait. hey galt: you could read any thinker from plato onwards and see the same pro-intellectual, anti-hoi polloi sentiment. isn't that weird? when you read intellectual thinkers in intellectual books, they promote intellectualism. and somebody studying those same thinkers, reading those same books, interested in that same intellectualism... also holds it in high regard? holy shit galt you're a remarkably astute reader! here, have a handful of classics - please read them, i'm dying to know what you can divine from them with your eagle-vision!

as for my 'anti real work rant verbatim' stuff - i worked a bottomrung apple office data entry job every single day, fulltime, over christmas. yeah, i'm totally against "repetition of the same trivial operation". dude i spent a 4-5 hour portion of my workday this christmas type-inputting customer's guarantee forms into a computer system. you're talking out of your ass again. it's simply wondrous. i'm literally laughing out loud in my chair.

also your second quote could just as easily be attributed to a thinker such as nietzsche as marx, or indeed myself. so because you see a tiny part of that sentiment in myself, does that make me a nihilist, too? a lifelong nietzsche puppet? a mere epigone?

shut up ken you fucking marxist

lmao i worked my first job when i was 22? thanks for letting me know jay. i turned 22 about 2 weeks ago. if you're saying i worked my first job at 21 then dingding! you know everything about me, evidently. i'm sorry i wasn't down the mines at age 13 because my deadbeat alcoholic father spent all of my school-lunch money journeying to st. ides' heaven. i'm sorry that my bourgeoisie upbringing wasn't hard enough for your liking.

hey jay, guess what? YOU SOUND LIKE A MARXIST.

holy shit, i love this thread, but... you know, start discussing some books already. hint: g@lt is not a book.

i'm all out of pop-corn. brb.

Uzique wrote:

bla bla bla etc ... that goes to you, too, varegg. you can be wrong sometimes! even though you're older than me and infinitely more wise! i'm the one studying at a research-heavy academic institution, interested in pursuing a career in academia. i think i know more about the history of 'big ideas' than you. sorry! and also sorry for not having any red armbands or large flags draped in my room! i know i'm an awful disappointment.

I can definately be wrong sometimes, maybe a tad more often than that also ... never argued against you being a way better academic than me, infact I've never been and never will be an academic ... without a doubt you have a great lead on me concerning knowledge in more fields than I can be bothered to list.

But you know what? ... that doesn't concern me for a second, I made a choice based on what I wanted to do with my life just like you made yours ... and just like you I'm happy with where I am today so there's nothing to be sorry about!

<insert standard obligatory insult here>

I picked up Orientalism again last night. It started with me trying to refresh my memory on something, then I just decided to re-read the whole thing. It's an interesting perspective

A very easy read, all things considered. I had the pleasure of seeing him speak about the same time I read the book in college. Shame I didn't get him to sign it, but then again I only have a paperback edition

i actually achieved something though that was recognized during my degree. i'm not saying it's important, nor am i waving it in jay's face. i'm not even mentioning any of that stuff (which you are very kind to mention!) i'm merely saying he didn't go to an academic institution, thus he has no experience of academia - i could make these statements even if i was a bricklayer, it makes no difference. your statement that you "graduated at 20" is not a special achievement, it's just you trying to contrive some banal fact as something significant.

you know that there's a difference between a research-intensive university and a higher-education institution focused on turning on business majors, or vocational-leaning degrees. they're both still 'officially' universities on paper/by charter, yes, but their aims and goals are very different. over here in the uk the non-research institutions used to be called polytechnics. you're acting as if what i'm saying here is tendentious. come on, stop being obtuse.