Here's an interesting topic ... but you can't have it because the libs want to define terms for three hours FUUUHUYUUUUCCCCC

Google Nasim Najafi Aghdam

Like I always find Victor cringe, then realize that he's the one who's the most adamant asset here. Very ideological, Eh?

More overconfident misreadings of 1844. Marx was never asking the question of what was in alignment with human nature, in terms of there being a fixed essence. You don't understand what you were reading, but that puts you in the same boat as most Althusserians. "Genus-Being: On Marx's Dialectical Naturalism" by Thomas Khurana is a helpful paper on what Marx was getting at in the 1844 Manuscripts, for anyone interested. There's a pdf you can find via Google but also a lecture on youtube covering the same ground. Marx was not a liberal or conservative in 1844 or prior, he was ALREADY critiquing what Althusser claims he wasn't by the early 1840s. He was not lamenting a corrupted human nature. He certainly changed the way he talked about society over the years, but alienation in labor itself even starts at the level of the society and not the human's subjectivity. He needed a materialist account of alienation to get to either ideology or commodity fetishism! Even if he doesn't say it explicitly, both take alienation as a starting point! You understand this once you actually learn what alienation was to begin with!

Wow, I never thought I'd find myself in Victor's corner. I think anti-humanism and the so-called epistemological break is a really privileged debate that misses the point. In other words, it's academic wankery.

I use this definition: ideology is a (set of) belief(s) that someone doesn’t necessarily know they have which influences their behaviors. This situates ideology at the nexus of the ideal and the material. It also uses “influences” rather than “dictates.” This negates the possibility to use ideology as a predictive conception to the degree that someone would say “they are controlled by their ideology.”

the argument over the definition of human "nature" was so frustrating! i know you guys know spinoza's distinction between natura naturans, and natura naturata, but you were talking past each other by not making this distinction over what "nature" means

I think the core assumption that Marx brings that goes wrong is his attachment to predictive theory of history. He wants a science of history, which leads him to devalue the contingencies of history itself. This leads him to strongly emphasis emergce over eminence, where ideology becomes whole derivative from dialectical materialism, without taking into account the dialectic relationship between ideology and material conditions. Sybologies have their own dialectic which influences and throws off the otherwise deterministic course of the material dialectic, as symbols have a sort of arbitrariness, but at the same time are vital technologies for information coordination. Symbols also rely on our psychological seceptability to them, which has a stabilizing force against the more radical logic of capital.

Ideology can be a perspectival and participatory knowledge. You can try to translate it into propositions, but that would be the part of philosophy that is always unfinished, as the source material has inexhaustable meaning.

I watched Memento and really liked it although or because it also horrified me. Now I'm feeling stupid. :(

the mentions in the description go crazy xd

Good episode. Lots of distinctions I don't understand myself, but that's then the episode where I have to be focused and think along.

Did you read the substack?

The "looking at shit for health reasons" thing is an explainer Zizek made up. "Inspection" is not something Germans set out to do. I, for one, prefer the German style toilet - mostly because you can't have water splash on your ass.

Totally wrong reason he had to sell info wars . look it up.

Another thirst trap ..read Cormack McCarthy.

Why do i feel like the french philosophers were a CIA distraction?

Before I begin I’m throwing out here that I just switched phone brands. I suddenly have a strong sense of eating out of the trash can. But it’s ok because I’m a brand new man. I can see it in people’s eyes when I pull this thing out in front of them.

thank god no Diego on this one

Again I’m first (yeah I’m a loser)

Its nice to see Diego here, I love u guys, ure pretty good favorite spot of political philosophical conversation in KZbin.

35:20 isn’t this what the accelerationists want?

Christ, the comment section is infested with incels.

The material is pretty dense but I really enjoyed this discussion, thanks!

Hell of a show! You guys snatched "everything is ideology" toy from boy Zizek gave it back to the bytch who bites but sound right.

You brought up Kayfabe and I thought oh here it is he will finally bring up this is all simulated and none of it is good faith, the two parties are playing a part and have 0 interest in actually addressing the material needs but you went another route, there is a uniparty in the US and politics is completely kayfabe, Trump is the anomaly representing a new neoreactionary rival to the uniparty. He was the only one playing to win, the democrats dont believe he is a threat to democracy (he is to the illusion of democracy we are allowed) they just see him as another one of their esteemed donors. The left has a large blind spot for the rich colluding against us, you think every thing is systemic/ideology but they do in fact have dark rooms. Henry Kissinger was on The Trilateral Commission, The Council of Foreign Relations and Bilderberg(all established as explicitly anticommunist orgs) all unelected bodies of elites making the off the books agenda. Mika Brzezinski dad Zbigniew Brzezinski founded the Tri Com with Rockefeller, thats not strange at all, Some good books "The Power Elite" "Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management", we have two factions of a single party that work at the behest of the world economy that only argue in the margins about how to best manage the productive forces of the nation, they gave us an unplugged controller called politics.

I’m surprised Pills didn’t draw parallels to Žižek at 38:00. All I can think about is the Adjuster being a perfect representation of the return of the repressed and the Real exploding forth. The Real doesn't care about your tech bro incoherent ideology. It’s going to explode through the gaps in your ideology. How can that trauma ever be anything but violence? The inescapable logic of the system is shattered by the radical indeterminacy of the Real. Contradictions laid bare, and the symbolic starts to shift. New desires start to form as we understand our lack. (This is a theoretical discussion of the deeper philosophical meaning behind current events. I really don’t need the feds at my door. I do not condone violence in any form.)

By the way, a podcast for Ted would be very bery interesting.

10 minutes in and you guys are spitting nothing but facts. Great stuff

was really looking forward to you guys discussing this topic then I heard that Diego’s unbearably annoying voice… wish it could just have been the episode without him.

worth the relisten <3

Good ep

5:00 i have not listen the whole episode yet, but i hope you introduce all the critics by Ranciere. To my mind the critics by Ranciere on Althusser and the concept of ideology is the most interesting stuff on the topic of Althusser.

its reuploaded?

I made the first comment and IDK WTF this is even about yet.

I have to disagree with you guys on here. This episode feels cynical. This is the story of a guy who has experienced in the flesh the failure of the corrupt corporate health system in the country. He is someone who has the courage of taking action, even if that's outside the confines of what we consider "moral" or whatever made sense within his worldview. He is not pretending to be Che Guevara. It's like in "intellectual" environments we need to have a flawless theoretical framework and debate hundreds of people instead of taking any action while millions of people keep dying every day. Some people don't have that luxury and some people didn't have the opportunity of learning the entire history of western leftists thinkers.

on politics and leftist terrosism you can read the novel "nada" by jean patrick manchette, great one

Surprised yall didn't even mention how he was radicalized by his own personal back injury I feel like this is the most directly materialist read you can give for the whole killing; he wasn't doing this just because he felt some idealistic duty against corruption, he did it because of real, physical debilitating pain that this guy and other guys like him had indirectly facilitated. I think this is why overall the personal politics or background or individual beliefs or whatever don't necessarily match up; because the material realities of his own physical body trumped all of that.

you guys seem really disconnected from the reality in the USA, fr. Free Luigi.

I'm no fan boy but I thought Pills was sharp this episode.

Why the unilateral hate for humanism?

I hate to do it but contrapoint’s endlessly critique power is probably true. This is what the first salvos of class revolt in the 21st century are gonna look like, messy and contradictory. You can lament they’ve not read Bakunin or you can go with the flow.

Pair this with most recent True Anon episode same topic.

LM's ideologically incoherent statement comes off as Tier-1(ie: Normie)Techno-Capitalist, radically Centrist, Effective Altruism by way of Ted K & all fed through ChatGBT. I agree with the fellow who said it's "different ideologies battling it out with each other". Someone on a different podcast made the observation "him citing Michael Moore is like if Brevik cited Bill Maher". This remark was intended to show just how"Normie" his perspective really is, as far as we know. Having said that, I pity the guy, which is infinitely more feeling that I'll ever have for the likes of Thompson. I hope something other than some pseudo-political "altering the discourse" BS comes out of this. I really do. "Evidently, I am the only one to face it with such brutal honesty" is the high point. He nailed that ending. The opening lines about "the Feds " and how much he respects the thin blue line - this is sus. It reads coerced, or at least can be read as kinda coerced.

I'm just so glad to hear Diego's voice here ❤ love u babe

Babe, new analytical framework just dropped. We're saying "is this serving ideology?" now

On if a totem can be an idea or not; I think it doesn't need to be, but nonetheless, people like to concretize the immaterial, so something can be a totem as an idea, but people will try and make a symbol.

When it comes to Luigi's efficacy, there's also something to be said of the tribal bonding of a shared scapegoat in the herd.

Mangione actually translates to "glutton", according to Google. Which is apt, because he was gluttonous of class-traitorism

Not this histrionic Diego guy again