/dead/ - Post-Left

>>2562
how are you underrated? stfu and stop humblebragging

>>2564
You wouldn't understand.

Erich Mühsam doesn't get mentioned enough
>badass music
>badass theory
>participated in an actual popular revolution that took care of Bavaria's monarchy and established a council republic that wasn't an authoritarian hellhole
>murdered by the nazis in a concentration camp because he was to based to be left alive
like seriously, he should be in the same league as Luxemburg, but just because he's an anarchist he was ignored my ML's and thusly by the left in general

>>2567
he even looks metal as fuck, wow

>>2567
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/category/author/erich-muhsam
Some of his works in English.

the real diogenes was probably nothing like the one we know today and was made up in the late roman period

Link to OP's picrel?

maybe the /dead/ found you
also fuck your cringe ass flag

>>2259
1. projection
2. all you can say about it is go back to leftypol, obviously you know somewhere deep inside i'm right and this thread is a weird as shit circlejerk for people who have lost all imagination, never played outside as kids, and want constant validation for their pessimism

>>2238
Marxism was invented to depress people

>>2260
>never played outside as kids,
The fuck are you on? I have fucking played outside as a kid, what does that have to do with anything? Are you really so fucking patronising that you think ppl on here are depressed cause they didnt have a dumb, mythical, petite-bourgeois picture-book childhood? Get fucking over yourself.
It must be fucking nice though, to delude yourself about the state we are actually in. When >>2258 said that there are no other things, no things outside of capitalism anymore, that is undoubtedly true.
What is there to do? You say 'do some hobbies' (wow what a fucking revelation, are you also the type that tells depressed ppl to be happier?). Like for example one could join a sports team. Sport teams, as we know them today, came up with fordism and the new demand for past-time activities . So it's a structure thats directly born out of capitalist development. But sports also reproduces capitalist ideology, seeing any field as a field of competition, with the winners eligible for big-money sponsorships and semi-prominency. If your arent able to fulfill the specific perfomance standarts, your are useless. Also, sports are being consumed as commodites (just like literally everything surrounding us) and thus also produced as commodities. Ones it gets proffesional, sports is no longer done for intrinsic value as sports, it is only a way to accumulate money, sport is only made to be sold.
Same is true for the next example I'm gonna look at: arts. No matter if you are drawing, making music or movies, it has all become commodities. If you draw, you are better ready to lower yourself to drawing pregnant furry commisions for small money. Forget doing something just for its own sake - the market for art is big and inflated, so you better lower your standarts. But at least the field of drawn art isnt as dominated by giant mega-businesses as movies or music are, squashing any creativity in favor of marketability. But what's even worse than them are their counterparts on the "indie" scene - pumping out one dull nightmare after another in desperate attemps to subvert the culture - sadly not understanding that they reify industry norms by doing so.
What other hobbies are there? Im sure there is a hole host of stuff Im not evenPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>2184
Yeah I'm in prison, a prison called society

>>2263
damn all that text just to say "i'll only see the reality i want to see"
good luck at living. I'm actually sorry that everything you do, you feel like you end up trying to make money off of or being forced to spend excessive money on, or that other people are trying to make money off it and that ruins it for you.

On what you said "hurr get over your childhood or something", it's nothing like "get over your childhood" or "you're sad because you didnt have a mythical perfect petite-bourg childhood", its literally the opposite in both cases.
I meant that you obviously have no idea of how to do things that don't involve buying or selling (except writing essays about your anger at everything on leftypol dot org) because you're leaving out the dimension of play - which imlies you never fucking did it, or else you'd understand that not everything is about buying shit and selling shit or formal organizations or any of that. But you refuse to see this. Idk how or why or if you've just been having a bad week or something or who knows what. But its ridiculous as shit.


And I mean I have to add, that I'm here because I have generally the same politics and views of society. What I don't share is the pessimism and small-mindedness about my own range of action. I do agree that much of what we do does unintentionally support or buy into capitalism. But I also think there's space for a neutral ground (which is trying to be impinged, and may need more and more courage of subversive attitude to carry out as anything not pro-empire is seen as criminal and anti-empire) of just meaningless and informal play, and there's also the space of subversion of capitalism, which is a whole set of activities and relations in itself which you could put your time towards. So I can't understand at all why there's all this vitriol to support the idea that there's nothing we can do that's not commodified. For example, why do you have to draw furry art if you draw? You can just draw. The point of a hobby is that you just do it, without making money. And you can do it without expending excessive money too, on specialty items or things that make you feel good and supplement your identity. Those things are an option, and an option which we can opt out of. Obviously it's super fucked up that so much is commodified, and I'm not saying we can opt out of society or aPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>2500
i'm sorry anon i'm just taking issue with invoking history as an authority à la "it didn't succeed so it's bad". it's the same type of thinking that makes you reduce religion to domination because the catholic church is still around while the revolutionary peasants aren't. as walter benjamin once said one has to brush history against the grain.

>>2503
The revolutionary peasants were not anarchists either. They still wanted kings and shit.

>>2503
>à la "it didn't succeed so it's bad"
it didn't happen so it didn't happen
I don't care about things might have happened, like religion aiding emancipation
also werent you invoking history as authority too?
>but if you actually knew any history you'd understand the role millenarian movements played in the middle ages

>>2507
secular anarchist theory hasnt lead to shit, but secular statism has created the largest and most oppressive empire ever….. time to give up secular theory and organizations too fam :(

>>2508
>secular anarchist theory hasnt lead to shit
this is /dead/, I know
still not an argument for spiritual theory

>but secular statism has created the largest and most oppressive empire ever
ISIS never happened
or taliban rule in afghanistan
or spanish inquisition or the saxony wars of charlamagne

>time to give up secular theory and organizations too fam
this is sooo dumb. just because secular theory didnt work doesnt mean that spiritual theory does. in fact, all social anarchisms, be that spiritual or secular are trash. get into post-left theory fam ;)

I had no idea it was hyped that much, I don't see it mentioned that often, but apparently it is by far the most popular book on the library: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/stats/popular/1

>>2399
Burger retard Invis Committee have been shiling ut offensively heavily since almost its release.

>>2399
Honestly page 2 has all the better reads.

>>2427
I sort of agree, it would have been better as a book about Holocaust resistance without forcing the ITS and "jouissance" shit into it.

> Dora Marsden - "The Stirner of Feminism"?
> Did Dora Marsden "transcend" Stirner?
http://www.lsr-projekt.de/poly/enmarsden.html
tl;dr: no

I think she goes too hard on the shit about war and public opinion… at least I see it totally different. This is based on what i read from that one essay you posted in another thread btw I havent read all of these. But her idea that victory is what influences people to accept somethins is really cynical and imo glosses over all the huge effort that gets put into propaganda, in order to stem public discontent with victors who are shitty. And while I like her rhetoric (which is very to the point and poetic at times) about the mutual struggle of all against all to inhabit space and consume in order to live, I think she runs too far with it at times. At least in the sense of taking literal overt struggle and pure domination as the most important thing.

But I don't know if her ideas get more refined ever. No matter what, I think she's brilliant and a great rebuttal to anarchists, but ultimately not a stopping point. More like a good starting point, to ask more questions from.

>>2377
>>2388
I read that, too and a couple of other essays by other people appearing in The Egoist and I just don't see how any of them add anything to Nietzsche/Stirner. I have that problem with a lot of egoist, insurrectionary and post-left theory. So I guess what I'm asking is what makes her special and worth reading, according to you, OP?

>>2391
stirner at least doesnt go so hard on the conflict parts as marsden does. Lots of people read stirner and stay in that "clerico-libertarian" anarchism because what they get from him is "chillax and just do what you want"
And dora is like "what i want to do is enslave you all >:)"
I mean not really at all. But the point is that she takes it further and more explicet with the depiction of the necessity of conflict where someone wins and someone loses, and how this can't be reconciled with a philosophy that disavows domination of all kinds or at least is uncomfortable with openly acknowledging it's role in their lives

if anything it's as simple as she wasnt just against leftists, but against anarchists too

(but i'm not OP, and i dont think you should read all of her stuff cause it's probably not that important)

I don't know what the heck you are talking about but I will bump this thread anyways

oh shit nice font here in this here reply box, nomsayin?
nice

More "egoists" should read this:
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/renzo-novatore-anarchist-individualism-in-the-social-revolution

>>2281
Same. Don't get me wrong, it was an entertaining read and still has me thinking and dreaming of striving for the "sublime", but one can tell he's not the best writer. Will read more of him, though.

The new translation by Wolfi: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/max-stirner-the-unique-and-its-property

wolfis translation is the best one, although I would still really suggest you give it a try in german if you can
even the wolfi translation really struggles to get stirners wording wrong (sometimes i even feel hes writing more of his interpretation into it than needed)

I was told this one I think

>>2339
Are you just fucking around or does he actually call spooks phantasms, that's absolutely hilarious, I'm gonna start calling spooks this way now.

>>2357
Fantasmagorías>Phantasms>Spooks>Geist

>>2169
>To be a true egoist, does that mean embracing illegalist gang?
No.
A 'true' egoist does what he desires. If he desires to break the law and do illegal things, he does it. But if he doesnt, it wouldnt make him 'less' of an egoist. In fact, doing crime just because you think it's what 'real" egoists do is super spooked, because you put the notion of being an egoist before yourself.
What Stirner is talking about in that quote is that doing anything solely for your own good is always a crime against the state because the state only recognises you as human if your actions are carried out with the state's well-being in mind.


that being said illegalism is really dank, it's just not a prerequisite for egoism

marx himself liked to fuck shit up in the streets when drunk, illegalism is pretty leftist in general if you ask me fam

>>2176
I am no longer interested.

>>2177
get owned contrarian child