Thread 24655125

Is anyone else tired of the anti-intellectualism on 4chan nowadays? It's unironically getting to the point I'll open a thread about a somewhat complex subject, and every single post is some variation of "lol don't care." Why are people even on this website if they have nothing to say about anything?

>>24655125 (OP)
Yes, but it's a worldwide trend and there's little you can do about it beside start your own little boys' club. Also, post it yourself. If even ten of the regular posters effortposted every couple days, this place would be full of it constantly.

>>24655125 (OP)
if you want a more serious environment then you need to go to registered forums with handles and stricter moderating
>also
4cuck is a porn image board what exactly do you expect here?

>>24655125 (OP)
>Why are people even on this website if they have nothing to say about anything?
Isn’t that the same for you, with this post? You don’t offer a solution. This is just an inane observation that any retard could come up with just by lurking for a day. You probably killed a thread full of insightful discussions by posting this. Great job, retard!

>>24655125 (OP)
problem specifically with online debating is the person who is seen to 'care' more is triggered and sperging out. Therefore, the person most affected, automatically loses, the argument. It's a strategy that doesnt make that much sense here when we are all anon but has taken over X/ any other online forum and filtered in.

>>24655125 (OP)
When you see a "didn't ask" be sure to reply "I asked".

lol don't care

>>24655125 (OP)
There's a temptation to slip into rage baiting when effort posts go completely ignored just to get some form of attention.
Being the first relevant reply in a general and getting ignored till it hits bump limit does things to a man.

>>24655574
>There's a temptation to slip into rage baiting when effort posts go completely ignored just to get some form of attention.
>Being the first relevant reply in a general and getting ignored till it hits bump limit does things to a man.
This, unironically.

>>24655125 (OP)
You're just a self-centered pseud. Get over yourself, pseud.

>>24655125 (OP)
blame wojak memes

>>24655125 (OP)
You talk like a fag and your shit's all retarded.

I pretty only use /lit/ now because of it. We still of our form of performative secret-club appeasing shitposters, but at least they're on topic. Aside from a select few generals I find it impossible to participate on any board these days. It's a much different website from the one I started using in ~2010. The downward turn started exactly when you expect it to have started.

>>24655125 (OP)
>and every single post is some variation of "lol don't care."
Summer is almost over, and the 15 year olds will have homework to do instead of free time to make stupid comments on here

>>24655125 (OP)
it's the twitter tourists. they try to act le based and edgy like they do there.

>>24656025
Summer is eternal.

>>24655125 (OP)
No area is safe from the Brownening

>>24656066
zoomering*

>>24656066
this

>>24655125 (OP)
Yeah, but what did you ask 4chan?

>>24656066
This is all gonna end with multiple nations just nuking the subcontinent. "You can't stop them!" says Jean Raspail. The fuck I can't, all I need are enough ICBMs.

>>24655125 (OP)
You're a FUCKING frogposter

kys you dumb frogposter. you made your bed, now lie on it

>>24656100
The fat guy isn't enough of a flaming faggot to suit the role.

>>24655125 (OP)
The anti-intellectualism has a very obvious political character that needs mentioning.
The populist right has made some scathing critiques of academia in recent times, some of which were certainly merited, but they have unfortunately concluded that any kind of intellectualization or abstraction is to be avoided as it lends strength to left leaning academics. The most obvious example is gender theory abstracting gender to such a degree that it has opened the door for transgenderism and various kinds of indeterminate positions. The populist right counter to this has been to reject any discussion of gender in abstract, even though it's entirely possible to do this in a way that reinforces traditional gender structures, and to insist upon physical reductionism. Another example that was happening more so around the mid-2010s was the idea of a 'social construct'.
The worst part of all this is that a political movement with some sympathetic goals will leave for itself zero tradition or intellectual influence, instead being remembered as some kind of frenetic expression of frustration that peters out within a generation.

>>24656474
Well said.

Join my invite only anonymous textboard centered around the humanities. Moderation is laissez faire like 4chan, and the content or tone of the post will not be moderated, but trolling, offtopic, spamming or blatant baiting will get your invite banned. The invite system (like in private trackers) is there to prevent loweffortposts like those you speak off, raiding and general.

>>24656555
So does it take days to get a reply or is it a glorified gpt interface with the occasional anon?

>>24656564
actually I just finished writing the software so there is a population of zero (0), but I'm hoping that people want a secluded place to discuss the humanities now that the larger web has gone to shit. The invite system makes it pretty resistent to astroturfing, LLM spam, etc.

>>24656571
It also makes it resistant to any engagement at all.

>>24656555
It's cool to see altchans still popping up. I appreciate you.

>>24656588
I believe. When everything is behind an ID-verification or an age checking wall, and when platforms demand user info dumps, and when LLMs are so advanced and cheap that the internet is (even more) flooded with slop posts, people will return to small gatekept websites.
>>24656594
thank you anon

>>24655125 (OP)
lol don't care

>>24656632
Why would the normies do that instead of just chatting with the superadvanced chatbots who will both provide better information and be more sycophantic? Why would they trust some small site owner to gatekeep their information instead of the large corp everyone else is trusting with their information?

>>24656644
>posting against AI
But AI says you can't do that. That's mistaken.

>>24656644
if you use imageboards/textboards/bbs you're not a normie. I don't want people who talk to LLM anyways. Let the cattle be cattle. If they want to fry their brain with LLMs, let them.

>>24656658
You still haven't answered why they would trust your imageboard to not be using LLMs and glowie mods instead of just using snap or discord chatroom or some decentralized thing they can control to a much higher degree.

The problem is the pseuds who read fifty million words of abstract philosophy without having a basic foundation of reasoning skills. They are gullible beyond belief

>>24656664
it's not something I can prove or disprove, but it's the same as 4chan or lainchan or any other bbs. With enough skepticism you can't trust anything. Also, it's a textboard, not an imageboard.

But anyways, the case of textboards is that they are websites, not apps. Being basic html, they are indexable, archivable, and there is a wide range of tools able to use them.

>>24656474
The anti-intellectualism on the "populist right" (I would disagree that it's limited to that group) is particularly bad, and getting worse, but is also a result of an increasingly stupid, low attention-span, low consciousness culture where people suffer narcissistic injury from listening to someone who is clearly their intellectual superior.

>>24656675
>it's the same as 4chan
No because they appealed to and drew in normies without trying to ID verify them.

>>24656703
what does that have to do with your question or my answer?

>>24656667
I'm guessing your definition of gullible entails anyone who doesn't agree with you, the person who hasn't read much philosophy at all?

>>24656712
So your textboard doesn't support greentext since you don't understand what it means and you don't understand why people would have reason to be more skeptical of "anonymous" sites trying to verify their identity?

>>24656731
Text is made green if the line starts with a single >, as you can see in the images.
Also, this textboard does not require any ID verification and never will, I'd rather move it to the darknet.

Somehow, people are degrading even more in emotional maturity as the years go on. As deranged and tendie-fuelled the average 4channer was in 2005, compared to the average 4channer nowadays, they were responsible well-adjusted adults.

>>24656745
Then its just going to be bots inviting bots if you have no way to actually ID anything.

>>24656772
The good thing about invite systems is that you can ban a whole branch at once

>>24656722

NTA, but you'd be surprised how many people you'd talk to that have very sophisticated vocabulary and later-stage arguments and descriptions, but then when you try to investigate a basic syllogism at the foundation of what they believe they have literally no comprehension of what you're asking them to do.

>>24655125 (OP)
usually id reply another low effort reply to this but since this thread's topic is about the very same behavior, i shall put in a little effort and answer your question to the most of my abilities.

concerning the rise of anti-itellectualism it is indeed a global phenomena, as the first post stated, and it doesn't take a genius to see why we're heading this path. me personally i put the blame on two factors: easy access of information and intellectual demoralization. the former is easy to observe, just pick up your phone and start scrolling any social media and you'll be bombarded by a stream of information usually tailored to your niches. and even if not, and you want to look up a certain thing, you can simply google it how to do it. this easier access to information effectively diminishes its value, and turns your brain into a mushy mess unable to comprehend or focus on anything.
the second point mainly concerns AI. now you don't even need to gather knowledge that could help you perform your desired task, you can just channel all of that to AI. now the question becomes "why should i read this book? just ask grok for a summary". this in my opinion demoralizes the intelligent minds, and beyond petty copes like "well its just another tool just learn how to use it" the AI's impact on true intellectuals is daunting and humiliating. its like chasing after a treasure for decades only to realize there's no gold there, or it was stolen. even now as you saw my lengthy post you probably wondered if its AI, whereas back then it could only be a pasta or geniune.
for the newgen however, it kills the desire to hunt for knowledge to begin with, since why do it when you can just look up whatever you want?

my thoughts on this: i believe this trend is unstoppable and will only get worse, i think the next step is gene mutations which will also bridge the gap between the handsome and ugly, the genius and retarded since you can just configure your baby's genes to be whatever you want them to be. robowaifus could also replace women as did anime girls to some extent.
however in all of this i see a persistent pattern; the seperation of the idea from the whole. if an AI can replicate the knowledge and experience of an established lawyer/dentist/doctor, what's the point in chasing those fields? most people would work hard on their careers because of the money, or the prestige, or because they simply love it, and that's what i'm focusing on. perhaps there doesn't need to be a point, you do it simply because you want to, your passion is in and of itself the purpose. why do birds fly? why does the sun set? they just do, with no exterior reason. i think this will cleanse humanity as a whole, and ironically enough we may return to the origins of these noble goals, back when people understood the value of these ambitions, and its proponents weren't driven by materialistic desires, but rather the pure love for their fields.

thank you or coming to my ted talk

>>24655125 (OP)
"Intellectuals" are not doing their job.

>>24656777
Ok, but you can't actually invite users who will actually engage and unless the bots break some rules, you have no way of knowing which users are bots since you aren't identifying anything.

>>24655125 (OP)
Yeah, I got tired of it long time ago. People need to think a little more and stop being a sheep. Yeah, that includes being a contrarian. People should form their own ideas and not let the collective dictate their thoughts.

>>24656812
Bots are clearly obvious in many cases

>>24655125 (OP)
>anti-intellectualism

Dear anon,
Can you for once in your life not just pretend like you're not the smartest person in the room?
- love,
the dumbest person in the room.

>>24656764
2005 channers knew they were losers. Somewhere along the way they became temporarily embarrassed losers, simultaneously above the normies but also somehow the "actual" normal people.

>>24656474
It seems like your premise is that out right rejection of an idea is the same as being anti-intellectual, but if you look at mathematics it would be completely rational to ignore someone who made the claim 1 and 1 makes 5. There are ideas that just aren't worth debating and it's become clear that entertaining concepts like social construct (which was originally just intended as an observation not as a critique) has given people the belief that they are free to change those constructs just because they can. I suppose it could just be a problem of language and that if it had been named something other than construct people might've reacted differently, though that's just conjecture.

>>24656814
Then why do you have to make a whole new site to avoid bots?

>>24656856
Because it's not only to avoid bots, but human loweffortposts, trolls, raiding, drive-by shitposts, which comprise most of the low quality posts in these kind of boards. The bot resistance is a nice side effect. Of course, perfect is the enemy of good enough, and these systems aren't completely waterproof, but they are better that existing systems. Private trackers do work better, after all, too.

>>24655125 (OP)
Pretending women, blacks and meatheads are capable of being intellectual is a much more devastating form of anti-intellectualism than anything else. Even when the tards are white men their attitudes rest on precedents set by blacks, women and meatheads.

>>24656848
I don't think the comparison is quite apt because mathematics is built on a set of agreed upon axioms. Different philosophical positions often differ quite radically, not just in the consequences like whether 1+1 is 2 or 5, but in their foundations or axiomatization as in mathematics. Of course there are probably some ridiculous minority positions worth dispensing with but the 'social construct' isn't one. It's the byproduct of a fairly rich and well established academic tradition which, as ridiculous as it might sometimes appear, nevertheless includes intelligent people who have grounded reasons for thinking as they do.
Even the language you use in your post suggests a more nuanced and intellectually satisfying position. You point out that the concept has moved from observation to critique and that people have, perhaps falsely, decided social constructs can be freely changed. This kind of engagement is what I think is missing. Your position is a strong one that doesn't negate the philosophical origin of the concept but mediates and augments it in a way that produces a more healthy intellectual environment for everybody involved. The dialogue is then elevated and a more granular discussion about social concepts can take place, regarding when and how they might be changed intentionally, if at all.

>>24656806
My theory is that we are living through a tech revolution, but have to remember the revolution is not what is shown on the tech, but it is the usage of the tech itself. Humans use tools, but the tools change humans. Its a little like McLuhans "the medium is the message". Its like how people used to complain about what was shown on tv, and how its a bad influence or a good influence, forgetting that it was the simple act of watching tv that was fundamentally changing people and society.

Really, all internet usage is responsible for this phase of anti-intellectualism (chans included) because internet usage itself requires a shallow, skimming mental effort. Our historic intellectualism came from reading, which is a very deep, focused activity. It doesnt even matter what a person reads as much as a person reads.

Its something weird like, whatever intellectually bloom that came from the internet, which allowed intellectuals from around the world to discuss ideas, has now been negated by the simple act of intellectuals using the internet.

Anyway, people want solutions, right? Well, the first step would be too heavily reduce internet usage while reading as much as possible. That would force the brain back to a deep, reflective mindset that was necessary for intellectual pursuits. And then irl pro-reading/writing networks need to be established. A simple start is the library, since everywhere has a library, and I have it on good authority that they have books and places to write. I swear, we need to have a challenge where we librarymaxx for a few months. Simple spend a few months were we spends as much time as possible at the library reading, writing, and taking part in a groups.

And while I have introduced writing into this post, people should return to writing with pen-and-pencil. I will attach an image the begins to explain why.

>>24656474
Going to counter this assessment that the populist right is leading anti intellectualism.
Firstly because it's not what op was asserting - at all.
Secondly, the faux intellectuals of California and New Yorker academics and pop journalism that would paint a target on any subject under the guise of breaking walls of anything because "traditionalism bad". The issue is that they tear down cultural and natural laws, and don't take accountability for consequences, even worse they Blame the consequences on the previous culture and traditions and won't allow the structures to return thus ensuring the problems spiral.
It isn't anti intellectualism to shut down pseud culture critics. We don't need to re-examine the pay gap through a Marxist gender lgbt theory.

You seem to think the right is a solidified base, but the reality is that the new right is a reaction to an institutional takeover by people trying to implement Marxist theory to everything damn the consequences.

I'm seeing a lot of smug pseud /lit/ posters who critic the right but are completely absent when critic of the left is the topic. Again, like all leftist, no accountability is present, you want to let leftist theory dominate everything unimpeded and ignore the consequences of autistic children being guided into taking hormone blockers by groomers.

>>24656978
I can attest to writing being important. I started writing a daily journal using pen and it made me stop and think about what I actually did during the day. Helps me highlight where I went right and what I want avoid repeating the next day. It's a thinking tool and doing it in a way that forces me to slow down makes it all the more effective.

The problem I have with the idea of librarymaxxing is that it while it might work in the short term and I'm sure a handful of people would stick with it, it feeds into the productivity culture that got us here in the first place. Real deep thinking comes from leisure and if we want to get people to do more of it then we'd need to convince them that slowing down isn't a waste of time. I don't think we can solve the problems of the internet using the internet. It's like trying to solve bureaucracy with more bureaucracy.

>>24656474
>men cutting their penises off and pretending to be women is the right's fault actually
really nigger?

>>24656555
Just a quick question, not trying to shit on your idea.

I never understood why alt Chan's make more than 3 boards. Moot made 4chan with a single board because you want users to feel the activity, making a single random board would let users actually want to participate.

>>24656978
Most people are low IQ subhumans and increasingly most can't read (not that they would, even if they could). Our society is running up against a lethal combo of social media (fuels narcissism, psychopathy, and destroys your attention span), environmental poisoning (from rampant EDC infiltration into the water and food supply, from artificial light which dysregulates circadian rhythms, all leading to a 40%+ obesity rate in the USA, 20% for children, was less than 1% a hundred years ago), and reverse eugenics where dysgenic, low income, low IQ and mostly non-Whites were the only ones reproducing. And reproduce they did.

>>24656100
saved

>>24656932
https://youtu.be/z3rZXrLQUXw?si=7zbeWVo0gvfzr_8L
This explains it pretty well. We are living through the end stages of malignant egalitarianism. In reality, the old way of doing things (aristocracy wielding all the influence and the other 90% of the unwashed retards didn't make any important decisions).

>>24657171
>I never understood why alt Chan's make more than 3 boards
They underestimate how hard it is to grow a consistent user base, let alone one big enough to populate multiple boards. The guy you quoted would probably be better off just making a single general humanities board, then see how it goes from there.

>>24657171
I agree. Look at petrarchan, just one board and even it barely gets traffic. Best to just make a LITERATURE board and direct everyone instantly to it. Unlock new boards if it starts to scroll by fast, which it probably won't, but one can hope.

>>24657144
Sorry, I guess I didnt clarify what I meant by librarymaxxing. And you are right to point out what is wrong. And I am in agreement of rejecting the cult of productivity. Although I wrote is as such, I didnt think of it as a challenge to read and write as much as possible. Consider it an challenge of quality instead of quantity. The challenge of simply rejecting one mode of living for another.

What I would say would be a good challenge, although I would hope it would develop into a practice, would be to inhabit public spaces while reading and writing. Simply that. It would get people off their screen entertainment/socialization, and exchanging that time for leisurely reading and writing, and presenting those activities as such. In a sense it would be performative. The reading and writing would be sincere practices, but it would also act as a demonstration of the virtues of those activities in contrast to the more frantic, screen-based activities.

>>24656813
i barely post any more because of it. people just parrot their favourite social media persons opinions or post blatant, low effort/ai generated baits.

>>24657181
Well, I am not interested in them. But I am interested in those who are not. And the problem I see is that those who are interest and practice a more intellectual life have essentially isolated themselves. If we made an effort to take our activities more public, and into public spaces, even if it is only the library, we could begin, in a very small way, a positive step in the right direction. It would solve all the worlds problems overnight, but irl is real life, and that is what matters. If more and more people are retreating into their digital worlds, I think it is a responsibility of the intellectual and cultured to advance into the real world.

>>24656555
>invite only
>anonymous
lol
might as well make a forum

>>24657192
I am still convinced that lit and fit should be merged. Even for a short while to see if it can invigorate. Or we may have to admit that the internet is essentially dead. AI and bots have killed the comradery of it. No one has anything interesting to say to one another. The artistic possibilities of the format have been achieved. And we should go back to deeply reading real books, making art with tools in our hands (pens and paper, musical instruments) instead of typing inputs into mathematical programs, walking while imagining possibilities, and, heaven forbid, talking with strangers (it takes about 10 minutes of work and you will not believe how much people open up, like they are desperate for the friendly community they once had). But all the good things that can happen all begin with getting away from the screens.

>>24657237
Don't worry—the internet will be destroyed within a few years due to all the censorship and surveillance laws getting passed. Unfortunately, it'll take some 10-15 years before leaving it will be a mainstream endeavor, I imagine. I'd join the pioneers, but I live in an incredibly antisocial, frigid Nordic country.

The internet will be replaced by the jewish dopamine destroying metaverse, but that's only if they can make VR workable which would take at least 5-10 years to the point of getting to mass consumption. Other than that (replacing internet with VR like ready player one) I don't see why you guys say the internet is disappearing

>>24657233
Yes it is anonymous. The database table for users is just a list of valid access codes (to enable posting) and a reference to the user that invited the user (to allow banning whole trees if necessary, private trackers style)

>>24657259
There's already a growing anti-tech sentiment that's close to reaching the mainstream, and the internet is getting locked up as we speak. UK first, then USA and the EU.

>>24657171
>>24657191
>>24657192
Good point, I will reduce the number of boards

>>24657319
I'll give you some more tips, I've thought about making my own chan but I don't want my email spammed with CP.

On-top of making a single board, make sure you're using vichan because it's the most standard and updated template. If anything fucks up you will have an active community.

Figure out how to prevent CP spam. It will happen eventually, spammers will track when you fall asleep and you have a single hour to delete it before your hosting privileges are gone.
Shrty had image vetting before images got poster, some use Imgur or a booru to store and get images.
Better figure this out now before it becomes an active problem in your life.

Good luck

>>24657347
I've written the software myself so I know it inside out. I find this a more satisfying solution than using an off the shelf software.

Regarding CP, it's not a problem because it's a textboard, not an imageboard. I think images are a distraction and a liability. If someone really wants to post an image, they will have to upload it to imgur or some other third party host, so it's not my problem.

>>24657379
Good stuff, I like the idea of text boards because it just cuts out illegal content all together. It's just kind of boring for users. I hope it works out, make sure to submit your URL to allchan so it's seen by others.

>>24655125 (OP)
>Why are people even on this website if they have nothing to say about anything?

Because they were filtered from everywhere else, OP. That's the downside of not having any filters or gatekeepers.

>>24655125 (OP)
Well, the human race is retarded. They go to pro terrorism parades and shit. Did you really expect anything different?

>>24657269
Thats no surprise. I have a feeling a lot of people are going to suddenly wake up and realize they have spent the past 2 decades staring at pixels on a screen and will really want real experiences.

i haven't seen any evidence of anti-intellectualism on this site

>>24657252
Join the pioneers, bro.

>>24657259
>but that's only if they can make VR workable
they need to get rid of glasses somehow nothing that requires wearing glasses will ever be successful

>>24655125 (OP)
Yes. I run into this a lot on /mu/ with the next gen who've taken over but I think what's really happening is now im the experienced adult who must show the youngsters the way

>>24658038
Sounds like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic, or pouring water into a sieve.

>>24658038
I get along just fine with zoomers/whatever on altchans but 4chan is a lost cause.

>>24656555
sorry for being stupid but how do i join? i know you said invite only but im assuming somehwere in your post and/or image is the invite... also nice trips man!

>>24656022
I started around the same time and saw this place get noticeably worse after the 2016 election, then all the tourists decided to stay afterwards

>>24655125 (OP)
I stopped believing it isn't deliberately forced, even before the sharty hack which exposed where most IPs are coming from.

>>24658244
I'm developing a theory that the "governing class" have realized that having a population addicted to the internet is not actually good, and they realized the best way to get people off it and back to the real world is to make to as retarded and frustrating as possible.

>>24658255
but the internet is the ultimate form of bread and circuses, the final opium for the masses. A perfect indoctrination machine

>>24658261
I think thats what they thought, but then they noticed the problems chronic internet usage has caused in society, and they realize its destroying the thing they want to rule. The internet was simply too much, and creating a society that actually threatens their position of power due to its obvious problems.

Scroll through this thread look at what was typed out it’s a waste of time

>>24658285
>and they realize its destroying the thing they want to rule
the elites are not intellectual like in other eras, they just want money, power and sex. If they actually wanted to conserve, they wouldn't let in millions of muslims (whose culture is completely at odds with euorpean). The internet, a controlled internet, is perfect for them. It's like the two-way televisions of 1984.

>>24658294
I believe what we have seen during the past couple decades is a battle between two noble houses, like York vs Lancaster. One house is largely international, and their wealth and power is in the form of financial instruments. The other house is largely national; their wealth and power is in the land, people, and (formerly) institutions.

The house that is national realizes that the internet has dramatically weakened their national wealth and power. This house knows that they need a vigorous population, that is creative, innovative, responsible, and essentially, productive and constructive. That's how this noble house protects itself from outside forces. And the war in the Ukraine, and the economic power of China, and other international threats, has proven that the West is losing its ability to protect the National House.

The internet is what has weakened the population, and is threatening the national house. And its not what is on the internet that is the problem, its the practice of using the internet itself that is causing the problem. So they have a very strong interest in getting the population off their screens and engaging in the real world once again.

Something like this, anyway. But the big thing is this. There has never been a unified "elite" or "governing class". There are always two competing groups. And I would say that one strongly benefits of creating a population of internet addicts, and the other is very disadvantages by it.

>>24658343
>There has never been a unified "elite" or "governing class".
Yeah this is why WW1 was fought by a bunch of countries led by three literal cousins.

>>24658350
Exactly.

And in each of those countries, what happened to those cousins positions of power? All of them were overthrown by another group in their countries. One noble house defeats the other.

>>24658361
What? The same people and their grandchildren have had European countries for like 200 years now.

>>24655125 (OP)
There was always a substantial percent like this, but the number of apathetic retards here has multiplied to an unstable proportion. I think it’s bots too.

>>24655125 (OP)
You should have given me (You)'s when you had the chance. Now I am a shitposter and there is nothing you can do.

>>24656686
>where people suffer narcissistic injury from listening to someone who is clearly their intellectual superior.
I feel this a lot. I always try to dumb down the way I speak because I'm scared I'll offend somebody.

>>24657130
>tries to prove him wrong but proves him right instead

>>24658715
How? All he said was the right was "anti intellectual" because the left mass produces academic slop that leftist pop journalists cute unethically. That isn't anti intellectualism, that's holding people accountable.

Your idea of intellectualism is what's creating a runaway train of credentialing, where an individual's power is derived solely from academia and LinkedIn work history. That's not the intellectual side, that's the phony side.

>>24656555
>the content or tone of the post will not be moderated, but trolling
so any argument you don't like (can't counter) will be labeled "trolling" and the person making it banned. why would i bother engaging this?

https://4chan.org/rules
Rule 3.a prohibits trolling, and yet you post on 4chan. Curious...

>>24658793
https://4chan.org/rules
Rule 3.a prohibits trolling, and yet you post on 4chan. Curious...

>>24656809
Which would be...?

>>24657130
You don't know what Marxism is and you're just using it as a boogeyword for "leftist"

>>24655396
>False Dichotomy
>Well-poisoning untruth
Troonjoo hands hath begotten this here filth.

>>24655125 (OP)
The shortest possible answer is that 4chan has always slanted right, and in 2025, liberals are the only ones who read. Conservatives watch TV.
https://www.richardhanania.com/p/liberals-read-conservatives-watch
>inb4 it da muh feminist marxist gigajoo keepin da wite man down
>cause dey don't allow muh heckin based nazi bookz n shiet
No, 4chan has always slanted right, and the right doesn't really read anymore. New 4chan posters are more likely to be right-wing and therefore less likely to be readers.

>>24655430
OP's solution is self-evident in his qualm: anons need to start effortposting more often. I personally typically do so in retaliation to the sycophantic decentralization shills that plague the site, in wake of the willful effortposters' silence.

>>24655547
I care.

>>24656013
Underrated

>>24656797
I find this hard to imagine. Can you share an example/story?

>>24656028
Yeah, and, "Muh internet is dead..." Oh, and don't forget, "Muh cyberpunk UFO dystopia in two more weeks." I can confidently assert whatever I please. That doesn't make it evident, or true.

>>24657790
is this bait?

4chan has always had a troll culcha. People will say whatever irritates other posters, and the more intellectual the board, the more efficacious anti-intellectualism is in the trolling arsenal. Whatever makes you the most irritated is what will attract the most trolling as it is the most gratifying

>>24656164
>>24656193
Hit dogs holler.

>>24659219
Trolling is a fast-burning wick, as most of these opposers are underage and foreign. They can only organize and tactic to such a degree. It always eventually goes tumbling down
>tumbling down
>tumbling dowwwwwn...
Just look at the Snyderfags of /tv/, the famed logposter of /b/, and the insipid Nobodyfaggots of /x/'s beguilement. In the beginning, a strong reaction. Then, everyone realizes the limits of their practical and mental capabilities. And, finally: the wick blows out, like a fart, in the wind...

>>24656797
When did this happen; when someone argued in favor of faith, or when someone decried socialism against you? I'm curious to know if it could have been any other scenario (if such an occurrence has ever happened to you at all).

>>24656555
how will you gather new members? and what's the point of an anonymous board when the point is to produce some sort of intimate community?

>>24656806
The last day of the Butlerian Jihad is the day I die.

>>24656832
The concept of "normies," as they're currently understood, comes from a psychological study by one guy in the mid-90s. It had nothing to do with chan culture, anon.

>>24659160
You have no argument against him and backpedaled to using a trite ad hominem tactic.

>>24659190
Multiple anons have dismantled these sentiments. This post feels like a frustrated reiteration, from one of the previous anons ITT, more than it does a natural response.

>>24655125 (OP)
That's the way the world works today unfortunately. Intellectuals went from near stardom status (Sartre for example) to incels has-beens.

4chan being an extension of internet culture really highlights how short controversial topics engage way more discussion than ones that are more subtle and complex (excusez my English).

It also shows the return to tribalism in our way of thinking and acting (social media is responsible)

>>24659319
There was never a cultural drift from tribalism in lower society. It's only more evident, now, by exposure.

>>24659323
True but it's evident now because every social class, no matter how wealthy or educated has adopted to a degree that anti-intellecual (or not even anti, just indifferent) and very black and white way of understanding the world.

When people's worldviews are shaped by memes and 3 second videos carefully selected by algorithms to attack your dopamine receptors, the race to the bottom is inevitable.

If anything I'm surprised that so many women still read books, even if it's toilet literature. Men have been lost a long time ago except for a few greying intellectuals

>>24657172
I got one even worse.

>>24659375
You act as though common sense has not had 180,000+ years to embed itself into human DNA. We are not slaves to the screens, or algorithms. They are tools that are weakening society, yes, though by choice. Only the weakest of the dregs of Gaia will perish over a scenario with such an indignantly simple solution, which is: hang up the phone.

Similarly, I hate two recent trends I've seen.
The first is the daring to care about something or think and go deep on a hobby is considered bad when it was literally a cornerstone of the website
Like when /v/ calls you a "sweat" for actually getting good at something
The other, much worse one is the combination of deflection and pretending to be perfect
If you make a vulnerable post asking for advice, you'll likely get replies saying "it's not hard how is this difficult" etc etc
There's a dehumanising effect that's happening to people and I don't know where it came from

>>24659425
>There's a dehumanising effect that's happening to people and I don't know where it came from
Teenagers from other websites, and dullards imitating their prose. That's pretty much it.

>>24655396
like where

>>24659436
The Buffy forums and SuperHeroHype, of course!

>>24659425
the internet is rewiring our brains and how we behave in the world. /pol/tards blame the indians but many zoomers have these issues.

>>24656555
>Moderation is laissez faire like 4chan
nazi mods are better
moderation, as demonstrated by every online forum and social media platform, is a good thing
the issue is that the moderators need to have good judgement but the only people who want to moderate are people who want to censure others by way of censorship and always have personality hang ups

>>24659449
Summer is almost over, anon.

>>24657130
>We don't need to re-examine the pay gap through a Marxist gender lgbt theory.
I don't understand why. Nothing in your posts actually gives a reason to automatically dismiss this so-called theory. It seems, instead, you're simply substituting your own disgust and abhorrence at the idea in lieu of an argument, which is characteristic of anti-intellectualism. Worse still, it would make you guilty of the same wrongdoing that you're accusing those coastal academics of carrying out. You rightly criticize them for unfairly dismissing traditionalism, but aren't you dismissing other intellectual traditions here without due consideration?
It would be a far stronger position to actually understand what they're saying and to point out where they made a mistake. You might start with a critique of dialectical materialism - perhaps this kind of economic reductionism cannot sufficiently explain historical events? Instead of negating Marxism entirely, you might argue that their materialism is downstream of something else or needs to be augmented by an additional theory.

>You seem to think the right is a solidified base
I don't, that's why I used the term populist right. There are certainly different kinds of right wingers out there, many of whom are highly literate. Consider, for example, Roger Scruton or T S Eliot. Sadly these are not characteristic of the right as a whole either in mass or in elite positions and certainly not online.

>you want to let leftist theory dominate everything unimpeded
Anon, I am literally arguing for the populist right to intellectualize in order to impede leftist theory. I am literally asking for the right to produce an intellectual tradition so rich that it forces a leftist course correction. You reading and considering things profoundly and abstractly can only benefit the right.

>>24656555
foakh ouff

>>24656555
I can't join unless you invite me.

>>24659425
>If you make a vulnerable post asking for advice, you'll likely get replies saying "it's not hard how is this difficult"
It's not a new thing. It's always been like this on internet. When you're troubled with something, the best way to get an answer is to aggressively disparage the thing you don't understand to bait idle nerds into calling you a retard and showing you how it's done. You don't "have a problem with X", X is trash because you can't do Y. That way you get help and nerds get to feel superior. That's how it's always worked since the IRC and Usenet days.

>>24659470
You gish gallop, and attempt to magnetize the most innocent of discussional topics towards a leftist political lense, so transparently and wonder why people are beginning to feel tired of discussion. To say so much, and yet have nothing but trite to share. Not that anon, but in his place: I call you faggot. Looping this beat-to-death, hair-splitting, post-modern pilpul every single day? I would sooner willingly bend over a table for a Giraffe. You just can't take intellectual defeat as a sign you are incorrect. It seems the modus operandi of the left is indeed the incessant soviet demoralizing onslaught of random disinformation and persistent trivializing, which you are precisely accused of in almost every damned thread you appear in.

>>24655396
But we escaped the straightjacket asylums of forums with their petty tyrants because nobody speaks their mind and the clique with the most posts are always right and ban people who hand them their ass in debates. Forum culture infects all spaces with usernames and ranks. Even IRC/Discord chat channels become the same fucking echo chambers after a while.

>>24658215
>>24659476
I actually don't have a domain name yet. Give me a bit of time, I may be able to set it up later today.
>>24659452
Between reddit and 4chan moderation, I choose 4chan, although a bit more strict. Even /lit/ has a lot of offtopic or blatant clickbait posts.
>>24659265
It will be open access at the start so people can join, and later posting will be behind the invite barrier (not that getting an invite will be difficult, but it's a barrier that will filter many low effort posters or trolls).

>>24659859
> le anti intellectualism bad!
> Sets bar slightly above the floor so people may 'gain access'.

Yeah, this sounds about right. You have already admitted to capitulating.

>>24659470
You're talking like the most exhausting leftists straight out of the most deranged Reddit corners.
Man, I'm just not going to simulate an argument with you, ok? I got better things to do than to pretend this is important, just so you can understand the woke right or whatever new meme boogeyman you're terrified of.

We had an overabundance of useful idiots go to university because they were memed into it. They were desperate to use the bullshit they learned and wasted it by flooding the media with garbage such as Marxist theory and queer theory and gender theory.
I don't have to explain why I don't have to explain why they're worthless time wasting questions.

>>24659470
A lot of that is fairly thoughtful, but consider Al-Ghazali on when and when not to address a position:

>62. I therefore collected and marshaled those utterances [of the Ta‘limites], combining thoroughness and accuracy, and answered them at great length. The result was that one of the Sunnites found fault with me for overstating their argument. He said: “This is an effort on their behalf. For they would have been unable to defend their doctrine by such specious arguments had it not been for your pinpointing and marshaling them.” This criticism is justified in a way. Long ago Ahmad ibn Hanbal found fault with al-Harith al-Muhasibi — God have mercy on them both! — for his writing books in refutation of the Mu‘tazilites. Al-Harith said: “Refuting innovation is a duty.” Ahmad replied: “Yes, but you have first reported their specious argument and then answered it. What assurance have you that a man may not read the specious argument and it will stick in his mind, but he will pay no attention to the answer, or he will study the answer without understanding its real import?”
>63. Ahmad ibn Hanbal’s remark is true. But it concerned a specious argument that had not become widespread and notorious. However, once such an argument becomes widespread, replying to it becomes imperative: and replying is possible only after setting the argument forth. To be sure, one should not burden oneself with a difficulty with which they have not bothered. Nor did I do that. On the contrary, I had heard such argument from one of my associates who frequented my company after he had affiliated himself with them and professed their doctrine. He told me they used to laugh at the works of those who wrote in refutation of them, since those writers had still not grasped their argument. He then cited that argument, relating it in their own words. So I could not personally be content with having it thought that I was unaware of their basic argument, and for that reason I presented it; nor did I want it thought of me that, even though I had heard the argument, I had not grasped it, and for that reason I reported it systematically. My aim was to give the fullest account possible of their specious argumentation and then to prove its error to the hilt.

>>24659552
>You gish gallop
That's not what he did; you just learned this term and are using the opportunity to look learned. Also, the rest of your post is a dumb masquerade of high diction with no point and lolrandom humor that waa embarrassing 20 years ago ("I would sooner willingly bend over a table for a Giraffe", "I call you faggot"). Fucking let your balls already dude.

>>24659470
A lot of that is fairly thoughtful, but consider Al-Ghazali on when and when not to address a position:

>62. I therefore collected and marshaled those utterances [of the Ta‘limites], combining thoroughness and accuracy, and answered them at great length. The result was that one of the Sunnites found fault with me for overstating their argument. He said: “This is an effort on their behalf. For they would have been unable to defend their doctrine by such specious arguments had it not been for your pinpointing and marshaling them.” This criticism is justified in a way. Long ago Ahmad ibn Hanbal found fault with al-Harith al-Muhasibi — God have mercy on them both! — for his writing books in refutation of the Mu‘tazilites. Al-Harith said: “Refuting innovation is a duty.” Ahmad replied: “Yes, but you have first reported their specious argument and then answered it. What assurance have you that a man may not read the specious argument and it will stick in his mind, but he will pay no attention to the answer, or he will study the answer without understanding its real import?”
>63. Ahmad ibn Hanbal’s remark is true. But it concerned a specious argument that had not become widespread and notorious. However, once such an argument becomes widespread, replying to it becomes imperative: and replying is possible only after setting the argument forth. To be sure, one should not burden oneself with a difficulty with which they have not bothered. Nor did I do that. On the contrary, I had heard such argument from one of my associates who frequented my company after he had affiliated himself with them and professed their doctrine. He told me they used to laugh at the works of those who wrote in refutation of them, since those writers had still not grasped their argument. He then cited that argument, relating it in their own words. So I could not personally be content with having it thought that I was unaware of their basic argument, and for that reason I presented it; nor did I want it thought of me that, even though I had heard the argument, I had not grasped it, and for that reason I reported it systematically. My aim was to give the fullest account possible of their specious argumentation and then to prove its error to the hilt.

>>24659552
>You gish gallop
That's not what he did; you just learned this term and are using the opportunity to look learned. Also, the rest of your post is a dumb masquerade of high diction with no point and lolrandom humor that waa embarrassing 20 years ago ("I would sooner willingly bend over a table for a Giraffe", "I call you faggot"). Fucking let your balls drop already dude.

>>24659865
you don't know anything, so stop pointlessly speculating.

>>24659940
>you don't know anything
is this the extent of your philosophical banter?
> so stop pointlessly speculating
It's not speculating when the poster clearly outlined their plan
>something something maintain intellectual scrutiny.
>something something offer alternative solution: create altchan or hugbox system to gate-keep or in-group the 'intellectuals' together, and apart from, the common rabble.
>Common tactic of those wishing to be seen as "intellectually elite".
>instantly lowers the barrier to entry due to lack of engagement

How does this not sound like projecting?

>>24659955
>instantly lowers the barrier to entry due to lack of engagement
Well, how would you start from zero? You seem to be an expert in internet websites.

>>24659960
I am here for the dogpile.
I do not even agree with the premise of the OP.
So to answer your question: you are wasting your time and taking for granted what you have now because you got your feelings hurt.

>>24659962
Exactly what I thought, you don't know anything. Perhaps Twitter is the better place for you.

>>24659968
Off to Bluesky with you as well! Salute!

>>24659375
I have been thinking about something similar. I believe there is a cultural convergence going on between the different levels of education, wealth, culture etc. And the reason is that these group are taking part in the same activity ie. spending their time on the internet and social media. And I am of the opinion that its not the content a person consumes over the internet, its the use itself that influences a person. In the past, the rich and poor did very different activities. Now they live essentially the same.

>>24655574
I've had a few effort posts in my years here get some attention. Most just get completely ignored, though

>>24659935
>>You gish gallop
>That's not what he did
Yes. He did. I can read. Fuck off.

>>24660075
Wanna bet on who is more addicted to internet clout?

>>24660081
Same here, I do it for the love of the game. I write for the sake of writing my insights and perspectives. Whether they get attention is a consequence, not a goal or achievement. That's why we're here, we're anonymous and I don't want constant engagement. Anyone complaining that their walls of text aren't getting attention are just tourists from Reddit who think they deserve participation prizes

>>24659190
>New 4chan posters are more likely to be right-wing and therefore less likely to be readers.
So those who are not reading go to a board dedicated to reading to post ragebait? Big brain take there, anon

>>24660083
No, he didn't, and, no, you can't. Cope.

I need to identify /lit slide threads better.
This is for pseuds

>>24660090
Exactly. If you want updoots go to ChatGPT and you'll get your balls fondled for any midwit take you make.

>>24660084
Who do you think is more addicted to internet clout? Not that it matters.

>>24660110
Why declare the leisure activities of the rich and poor are the same if you essentially do not care about the outcome anyway?

I thought you pondered *deeply* about the topic and its ramifications. I'm sorry, find you boring on a feminine level.

>>24656978
>My theory is that we are living through a tech revolution, but have to remember the revolution is not what is shown on the tech, but it is the usage of the tech itself. Humans use tools, but the tools change humans. Its a little like McLuhans "the medium is the message".
>>24658255
>I'm developing a theory that the "governing class" have realized that having a population addicted to the internet is not actually good, and they realized the best way to get people off it and back to the real world is to make to as retarded and frustrating as possible.
There's also the "theory of relative maturity" from Arthur Koestler. It basically posits that society does not develop in a linear way towards greater freedom, but regularly lapses back into periods of barbarism and more autocratic methods of governance after the onset of new technologies until the masses have "conquered" and learned to manage these technologies in a way that won't destroy them. That could be happening now with the effect of modern technologies and asymmetric warfare capabilities offered by surveillance states forcing the pendulum backwards.

>>24660128
No, you begged the question of who is "more" addicted to clout. That is a different idea compared to the fact that rich and poor are taking part in the same activity. Who cares more about clout? It doesnt matter. Its not the content or its believed importance to the individual that is important. Its the simple act of both formerly divergent groups now spending their time performing the same activity. Its like McLuhan said: The medium is the message.

And you accuse me of being feminine when you cannot state a fact, but have to hide behind asking a question. Weak.

>>24660155
I, offered a bet.

>>24655125 (OP)
Intellectualism is leftist.

>>24660105
I don't want updoots. I want to have an conversation about a book I just read with one person. It is too much to ask apparently.

>>24660418
It is of you're boring.
Listen you come online when you don't have someone irl to talk to about something. But the same rules still apply, don't be boring and people will engage.

So many guys come here and post a blanket of their own thoughts with no room for anyone to say anything.
Why do you think the best threads are single sentence questions posed at others?

>>24659318
>dismantled these sentiments
They haven't, they've either screeched about muh wimminz joos tranny fags in publishing or they've made sweeping statements unsupported by any actual data.
>frustrated reiteration from a previous anon
Yeah, he was right
>>24660091
Unironically yes, if you've never heard "/lit/ doesn't read" you need to lurk more

>>24660612
So you're someone who actually, sincerely and seriously doesn't think the previous decades of censorship and oppression of thought in the name of woke nonsense just didn't happen? Did you live through those decades or are you a child?

>>24660656
Read this reply slowly and carefully, because I can sense that you will see words that make you upset and you'll sperg out. Deep breath. Don't get me wrong, it's real. Not as intense as you're making it out to be, but it's real. Publishing is very, very, very liberal, and they don't want to publish illiberal work. But this has very little to do with anti-intellectualism on 4chan more broadly, and (related, but different topic) it has very little to do with men not reading/being published. Those things are because conservatives do not read and because men do not read. Conservatives not reading/men not reading has very little to do with the publishing industry being liberal -- it's market forces, essentially. We can blame the rise of short-form video in part, we can blame years of lowered funding in the education system in part, we can blame the growing education gap between men and women in part, all those probably play into it, but Lib Publishing Censorship!!!! is basically negligible. There's no Le Based books because there's no Le Based market for them. There's a few small publishing houses that put out right-wing literature, but they're tiny and they don't sell many copies. This reply will be difficult for you to understand because you're not familiar with the actual data, so read this >>24659190 before sperging on me. If you do read that, you will get upset and start screeching that its writer must be a tranny joo faggot. I suggest you google him before you say that.

>>24660679
There is nothing in that data that indicates reading habits.

>>24656474
>>24659470
Extremely fucking funny that this right-winger is exactly right, is trying to explain why intellectualism is valuable and necessary, is trying to explain why the right desperately needs it, and his compatriots are acting like total and utter retards in response
>>24659883
>>24659935
>>24660083
Cheering you guys on. The more you reject intellectualism, the better for the left. Keep it up!

>>24660696
>did not look at the chart I posted
>did not read the essay
Case in point, really. The chart I posted clearly shows conservatives disproportionately trust TV and radio more than printed material. Liberals trust the Wall Street Journal, a conservative newspaper, more than actual conservatives do. Which is very funny and very sad for conservatives.

>>24660679
>Those things are because conservatives do not read and because men do not read.
Yeah, because all the nu-books are for gays and women. I read things written by dead white men just fine ever day.

>>24659436
there are literally 1000s of them take your pick
ttp://www.bing.com/search?q=discussion+forums

>>24659764
this is a valid concern

>>24659185
oh great the homos are whining again kek

>>24660756
i hope this is a bad faith answer otherwise you are either retarded or 60 years old

>>24660679
>Conservatives not reading/men not reading has very little to do with the publishing industry being liberal -- it's market forces, essentially... There's a few small publishing houses that put out right-wing literature, but they're tiny and they don't sell many copies.
>>24660745
Like I said, conservatives don't read.

>>24660718
If you read the chart and the essay, it doesnt not provide any information on the reading habits of right and left wing.

>>24660777
I have faith

>>24660788
>Like I said, conservatives don't read.
Oh so you're roleplaying one moron?

>>24660612
>joos (I spell it wrong because people who don’t like Jews are stupid meanies >:()

the mark of the dishonest retard

Reading the comments I can't ask. To what end is the OP complaining?

Those arguing in favor of an unintelligent 'right' are doing so mockingly then turning around and acting as if none of it effects them? They're also the ones who fume over perceived anti-intellectualism the most?

If it did not bother 'intellectual' leftists as much as they claim then this thread wouldn't exist.

The counter points go;

>anti-intellectualism bad! It is so annoying!

>ok yes, most of academia is full of psueds but WHO CARES?!? It's better than no reading
>You know nothing - (Twitter vs bluesky argument)

> Something something bring up irrelevant argument partially relevant to anti intellectualism.

> Muahahaha! leftists are just so much smarter. the intellectual right has no base! Muahahaha! All of the colleges belong to ussss!

>men bad. men dumb. menmenmenmenmenmen! This is why - College!

>>24660592
>Why do you think the best threads are single sentence questions posed at others?
This is what I am talking about. Those are shit threads, but because it allows anyone to just blurt out an off the cuff answer, people engage.

If you try to talk at a higher level about the book, while still including open questions in your thoughts to help kick off a discussion, people will still ignore it because that requires a higher level of engagement.

Your idea of being 'not boring' is the shitposting we are talking about in this thread. Ultimately, you just want to belt out some opinions on random shit and move on. That is not good engagement.

>>24660612
>lurk more
Nigger, I've probably been here longer than you. But if the only thing helping your "argument" is an ironic reddit-tier heckin maymay of "we're /lit/ and we're le dumb XD" you are beyond retarded

>>24660800
I don't know what else to do for you except to tell you to look at the chart again. It is very, very clear. I even explained it for you. You are now pretending like we cannot extrapolate, unless you are seriously arguing that conservatives don't read the news but do read novels, which is transparently retarded. Especially because college education is highly correlated with reading, being female is highly correlated with reading, earning more money is highly correlated with reading, and living in a city is highly correlated with reading -- and all those things are highly correlated with being liberal. [https://www.lrs.org/2020/03/04/about-7-out-of-10-us-adults-read-a-book-last-year-but-among-those-without-a-high-school-degree-it-was-3-out-of-10/] You are going to get upset and deny this. I will then google phrases like "college education more likely liberal or conservative" etc and copy-paste the links I find. You will then once again pretend like extrapolation does not exist. Very predictable
>>24660816
?
>>24660830
Containment board

>>24660897
>how DARE you imply people who don't read much come on /lit/ to shitpost
>this happens so frequently /lit/ has a stock inside joke about it, you should know this
>oh yeah? well you're fucking REDDIT!!!
Amazing

I'm trying to spin for 4 frogposts in a row.

>>24660709
Every faggot that unironically uses the word "right-winger" is too insufferable to be taken seriously.

You know when dipshits try to invite you into a mudpit that solves nothing and only serves to exhaust you from even engaging in anything after the fact? That's what leftists like you the previous guy do all day. Just endless slop discussing retarded shit all day.

Again, YOU AREN'T INTELLECTUALS, WHAT YOU ARE DISCUSSING ISN'T INTELLIGENT, JUST BECAUSE WE DONT WANT TO DISCUSS THE PROS AND CONS OF CUTTING DICKS OFF AND MAKING US PAY MORE TAXES FOR REFUGEES DOESN'T MAKE US NON INTELLECTUAL, IT JUST MEANS WE THINK YOU'RE WASTING OUR TIME.

>>24660718
>WHY WON'T YOU ARGUE WITH ME OVER THIS SLOP STUDY I PULLED FROM GOODGOYS.KEK
>NON INTELLECTUAL - NON INTELLECTUAL
>REPLY TO ME YOU FUCKING CHUD RIGHT WINGER

>>24660861
You're right but don't expect a reply. This thread is made by leftypol and designed to exhaust and frustrate posters. It's basically brigading.

>>24660908
You talk like such a faggot and clearly argue for the sake of arguing. Why would anyone honestly engage with your slop posting?
You're here bitching about nobody wanting to even engage with you by rephrasing it as anti intellectualism, which is extremely fucking lazy, even for you cucks.

>>24660908
>?
!

>>24661012
>>24661019
>reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee TRANNIES! reeeeeeeeee BROWNOIDS!
>I'm upset!
I'm begging you both to please keep acting like this, makes things much easier for us

>>24661031
>why does this happen?
>this is why it happens
>nuh uh! I'm gonna argue no!
>yes, this is why. here is proof
>NUH UH! NUH UH!!!!
>here is more proof
>oh yeah? oh yeah? well... well... you're a FAGGOT! who wants to argue with you anyway!
You people are so damn funny, as soon as you start losing you pretend like you're above playing
>>24661032
<3

Reading through this thread, I am fairly certain there is an anon acting out three personalities.

>>24661034
Ok just so we're clear
>We want to cut dicks off children and we're going to scream about this like it's the most important social issue today
>We don't want that and think you're stupid and won't listen to your arguments
>"Heh keep acting like that, it serves our goals for you to disagree!"

It's like you're so far in your ideological cage you have no idea how fucking weird you are to normal people.

nigga no one likes intellectual. they act smug while theyre full of shit

>>24661058
>trannies want to cut children's dicks off and this happens all the time meme again
lmao. You're clearly not old enough to remember HB2, because nobody gave a shit about trannies before a bunch of Republicans in NC tried to stop trannies from going to the bathroom even though nobody was asking for it. The national backlash wasn't even a "pro-trans" backlash. HB2 was seen as an anti-gay bill. Trannies weren't a hot-button issue until Trump came along and memed you into thinking about children's genitalia all the time.

rangebanning north america would fix a lot of these issues

>>24661084
nta I would say that Fallon Fox was the first tranny controversy

>>24661084
Wow I really don't care about anything you just said. Sounds like a lot of winging over meaningless details that goes nowhere.
You can keep spinning your wheels over insignificant events however many years ago as if they matter. Your mental gymnastics towards justifying your tranny agenda is a completely worthless endeavor.

Go ahead, call this anti intellectualism. You see where we're at right? Why even engage with you, the end result is the same, you want to give kids hormone blockers that permanently damage their organs - THAT'S IT, that's the Occam's razor to your fucking argument. I don't care who contradicted themselves 4 years ago or who did what. Your end goal is repulsive, your arguments are pathetic and I don't respect you.

I'd do the same to a Nazi who says we need to kill all browns. Why even engage with their argument? You're just spinning the wheels, going nowhere arguing in circles.

>>24661102
>trannies cut kids dicks off! lefties want trannies to cut kids dicks off! this is true!
that's a meme and nobody cared about trannies until the right went apeshit for no reason
>know what? it doesn't even matter if what I just said is true, actually. because actually I'm upset about a completely different meme issue
>this is just like arguing with a nazi
less that 1/10th of 1% of all US kids are on hormone blockers, and there are no children under the age of 12 on hormone blockers. This is 926 children in the country. You are going to read that and then get upset and say I'm lying. I will post the study. (I'm not going to post it right now because I want to give you at least a little respect and let you find it on your own. Very easy to google.) You will get upset and repeat the organ damage thing. I will then post links that show organ damage is extraordinarily rare. You will not read those links and repeat yourself. I will post more links saying the same thing. You will then say something like no amount of damage is worth it. I will then post statistics that show without hormone blockers many of these kids just kill themselves. You will either reply with something like "heckin BASED 40%" or you will reply with something like "you want to force kids to take them!!!" No matter which of those you choose, I will call you a retard and laugh at you. At any point in this exchange you may get very upset and start screeching about how I must be a tranny, or a faggot, or a brownoid, or a joo, or or or, and I will laugh at you even more.

>>24658215
>>24659476
>>24656594
ok I got a domain, visit BYZANTINUS.NET in the next few days, the textboard will be there! I'm still tweaking some parts of the code. There will be one Humanities board at first, as anons suggested. As for the invites, the first few days, there will be a link in the main page for an invite self-serve, where you will be able to get one.

>>24655125 (OP)
Online discussion, much like the attention span of zoomers, has been completely destroyed. Don't waste your time or energy on /lit/. Go mingle and discuss with your nearest book club instead.

Humility is what's missing

>>24661134
'Malvertising' newage vibecoding ahahaha

>>24661148
that's just because of the domain registar parking page, anon. I haven't even set up DNS yet

>>24661152
registrar*

I'm not reading any of that, but the most basic fix would be ID-based access to internet. Teenage pseuds, youtube video essays and letterboxd/reddit critics soured me extremely hard on all kinds of intellectualism (and intellectual posturing).

>>24661139
I swear that this is the way. Let the internet be the normie containment site.

>>24661129
Anon you're trying to play off your argument as if you're smug but you're performing for an audience of 1, me, and I already know you're a repulsive basement dweller with 1 too many flags in their bio.

We've already settled on each other's sides, why even engage at this point. You've already lost the bigger picture here and now you're trying to win some pathetic argument here where you'll convince zero people about the benefits of cutting your dick off and wearing moomoos.

This will be my last reply to you. You can seethe and reply again and have the satisfaction of that, or don't, either way you've lost this argument.

>>24655125 (OP)
ay bruh niggas used to be smart on here now they sus no cap ong fr

Giggling and kicking my feet.
>*male high pitched voice*
teeeheeeeee

>>24661162
This, whoever the fuck self labels themselves as an intellectual is so far up their own ass that you'd want to quarantine those people away from your community.
Smart people like to have fun engaging conversations just like anyone else. Create a community that's fun for smart people and they'll show up organically, you don't get there by posting a sign saying "smart people only"

>>24661162
This please, just make everyone have like 8 hours per week to use the internet and use the ID card to access it, and fuck off after it's spent.

>>24655125 (OP)
they find you shallow and pedantic

>>24661791
i don't thoughbeit

>>24660918
>how DARE you imply people who don't read much come on /lit/ to shitpost
I read a shit ton and I shitpost. Get fucked you insufferable faggot. Your argument is dogshit and you should be ashamed of yourself

>>24655125 (OP)
OP i'm gonna find your mom, titty fuck her, cum down her throat and never call her again.

>>24661806
Trying real hard to be screencapped by a Twitter Indian

>>24659436
I would've said Amarna forum but it's been killed so idk. It's archived so can still read old posts for the time being
https://amarna-forum.net/

probably related to the sincerity problem if nobody believes you're sincere nobody will engage with your long winded arguments

>>24655396
A lot of traditional forums are really racist these days. Basically they can’t stay on reddit, so they returned to old forums.

>>24656686
>people suffer narcissistic injury from listening to someone who is clearly their intellectual superior.
seems to be happening everywhere.
zoomies saying anyhing classic actually sucks. poptimist culture pretending retard pop music for women deserves serious discussion besides actual quality music.
seems to be happening everywhere and it tires me endlessly.
where's the humility. it's narcissistic navelgazing. people never think "this dude knows their shit about this topic, maybe i should actually listen to what he's saying".
like when slobs get mad at people being healthy and doing exercise.
retard culture that purseus a dumbing down so no one feels left out and before you know it everyone has turds on their plate. i hate retards and cattle. as far as i know, they're all still fucking peasants.

>>24655125 (OP)
Sorry if my English is bad.
I believe that the right does not think abstractly, not exactly because it is "left-wing," but because much of the center does not participate intellectually, making it incapable of understanding not only the symbolic, but also the causes of things, without relying on individualism. In this sense, the world we live in is not only influenced by thought, but also by a sense of belonging. Thus, we seek means of communication that bring us closer together, and the right, having greater control in this regard, takes advantage of the lack of "boldness" to unite these sides against intellectuality. The current left is not physically active, but reflective in its analysis of structures. This makes it inaccessible to the incompatibility of the other sides. Interestingly, this is not only political but also cultural, due to the difficulty of finding answers to things. So why think if we don't know what to do? I believe that the answer lies more in the intellectual education of individuals who reach the masses to propose certain ideas, without analyzing them, beyond their own vision. There has been a change in these times. Life is no longer physical, real, or understandable. In this sense, to improve the situation in the future, education must be based on analysis. Not the kind that says the color blue is just sad, but the relationship between it and everything that surrounds it, creating meanings that allow us to find answers and, perhaps, new solutions.

Honestly, no. Intellectualism has to end. It's a mental prison that the men of Earth have trapped themselves within.
If you don't get it by now, you will soon. Change comes.

>>24663174
>racist
these 2 are good
chimpout dot com
naggets dot net
>kek

>>24663493
oops thats - naggers dot not

>>24663307
And yet the right has been the most outspoken critics of modern media and persistently recommend the classics - whole the left are the biggest shills for modern pop media because it promotes their liberal agendas.

So how are zoomers saying the classics suck, they're the ones who hate modern media the most, it isn't zoomer men who are seeing modern star wars, that's millenials. They aren't reading the current lit slop like a crown of thorns.

Your entire post is disconnected from reality and misdirected towards the wrong people. You think anyone not leftist and a zoomer male is bad so you attributed a bunch of ridiculous negative stereotypes that actually affect everyone but zoomer men. So you're not only a pseud posting time wasting posts, you're the exact type of power intellectual that most people ignore.
Just because nobody engages with your stupidity doesn't make them anti intellectual, you're just a moron.

>>24660756
Retard. Yeah go post on a forum with 5 active users.

>>24663634
>that's millenials
Not sure why you retards are so obsessed with acting like a minority of dipshit redditors represent anyone. Maybe it's just because broccolicucks get their entire view from twitter.

>>24663785
Because Reddit has 1.1 billion monthly active users + your retarded ass.
It basically encompasses all you millenial cucks who pushed therapy speak into every conversation and over prescribed meds to people.

Otherwise I'd love to know how people between 27-12 are responsible for this bullshit you pin on others. You faggots can't even claim accountability.

>>24655125 (OP)
Yes. Half the people who post here seem to be incredibly ignorant, and proud of their ignorance to boot. It’s shameful.

We never had this issue until the frogs showed up.

>>24655125 (OP)
Thats what happens when the intellectuals keep saying that my cunt needs more fags and sandniggers

>>24661057
Kek

>>24661134
For the love of GOD please delete all off-topic threads from the start. I would hate it to turn into /lit/ 2 where it's thinly veiled cooming/twitter/incel/culture war thread hell

>>24662196
Yeah whatever happened to that? Why did they shut it down?

>>24655125 (OP)
I have come to realize chat GPT is better fo4 discussion.

>>24666590
Go back.

>>24655125 (OP)
You voted for this

>>24661210
>>24661046
>You people are so damn funny, as soon as you start losing you pretend like you're above playing

>>24655125 (OP)
D-did anyone actually answer OP's question?

>>24665963
Seconding this. Porn addicts and /pol/troons poison everything they touch. /v/ is unusable because every thread is either a stealth porn thread or culture war bait, and /lit/ is infected with the same cancer. All the good boards on this site are the ones where the conversation can't be derailed into porn or politics.

>>24665963
>>24667346
that's the plan

>>24656555
>The invite system
enjoy your 4 30+ neet virgin unique posters. internet is filled with the graves of alt chans open to all. what makes you think that your invite only chan will work out?

>MUH POLITICS IS MY RELIGION AND I VIEW EVERYTHING THROUGH THE LENS OF POLITICS
Just die already. You political subhumans are the worst cancer on this board and website. Literature and philosophy are not right or left wing they're just literature and philosophy. And 4chan is not a fucking single entity. There are all kinds of people here.

Political subhumans need to kill themselves, I mean it sincerely.

It is a product of godless degeneracy.

Lacking religious morals makes you stupid.

You short circuit your brain chasing dopamine shamelessly.

You are really tired of degenerates and a degenerate secularist culture.

I am also tired of this, very few people have the self-control for prolonged focus on meaningful things.

Degenerates destroy any sort of attempt at meaningful intellectual engagement with their constant obsessive degeneracy.

>>24655125 (OP)
>Is anyone else tired of the anti-intellectualism on 4chan nowadays?
It's a cope because all of their attention spans are fried.
>>24656027
>it's the twitter tourists.
No, most native anon have fried attention spans now as well.
>>24656066
>No area is safe from the Brownening
Most white native anon have fried attention spans now as well.

I could keep addressing these endless cope variations, but it's all related to the same shit: friend attention spans.

>>24668235
You sound like a dweeb

>>24655125 (OP)
Its not even really about anti-intellectualism or pro-intellectualism per se but the power relations that exist between the two concepts, between overeducated and undereducated people. The intellectuals to lead the Revolutionary workers to crush the backwards peasantry who essentially believe in "folk wisdom". The debate between high status gentrifiers who lived in gated communities in Williamsburg, NY versus Cletus who lives in a trailer part. Its low hanging fruit for sure, but who cares what a bunch of inbred rednecks think? We need to drive up property values so they have to move elsewhere and invite a bunch of ingrate negroids into their neighborhoods while we live in our lofts protected by those same high property values.

>>24668294
You could have just said "my parents bail me out any time I get in legal trouble and I got into college because of nepotism"

>>24663359
Nah, I don't think that's true. We just need to stop being fags about it.

nigga its 4CHAN

why are you coming to 4CHAN of all places looking for "intellectualism"

>>24656555
>fails to provide invite

jay

>>24668676
it will have an invite faucet for the first few days. If I solve some weird databasw errors will be running later today

>>24668900
Rooting for you anon.

So whats the latest on that new site?

>>24668968
The server is running already at https://byzantinus.net/ , will be available later today. The index has an announcement with links to an invite faucet.

>>24655125 (OP)
>OP thinks 4chan was ever anything but idiots being idiots together
Don't get bootybothered.

>>24655125 (OP)
It’s entirely because of religious conservatives figuring out how to use the internet en masse.

>>24669002
Cool. Looking forward to it.