So, I read Hyperpolitics. And I dont understand the view of the future it has. Sure we live in era of hyperpolitics, but isnt dat hell and if it is, then wat is to be done if it is pointless to resurrect mass politics? It ends with fade to black, but in ac

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Verification	Security Check: URL detected. Solve to post.
Select	File / Embed / Oekaki
File	Spoiler All Images
Embed
Oekaki	[Oekaki logic integrated]
Password

'k Meppel, Drenthe 10/04/26 (Sun) 12:30:00 No. 302377 [PM]

So, I read Hyperpolitics. And I dont understand the view of the future it has. Sure we live in era of hyperpolitics, but isnt dat hell and if it is, then wat is to be done if it is pointless to resurrect mass politics? It ends with fade to black, but in acknowledgements lists Bhaskar Sunkara who is pretty much proponent of socialism as it was practiced under mass politics

It seems that the solution in the book if you even can call it dat is corporation by watever means available. Wat it says that crucially we are devoid of institutions but institutions are notoriously hard to rebuild due to elite hostility, so, all that is reasonable to do in the current moment is organizing communities into French communist villages basically. Otherwise its view of the future is unclear, any way, but it is kinda true in its description of current circumstance. I wish Jäger had a conclusion chapter with some thoughts about it, I dont think it ends adequately

AsianWomenWorshipper London, England 10/04/26 (Sun) 13:28:36 No. 302378 [PM]

File: 1791120515751.png (1.69 MB, 2400x1080, Screenshot_20261004-142706.png)

alan ody jews Solomon Paul Carter 10/04/26 (Sun) 13:36:14 No. 302380 [PM]

File: 1791120974540.jpg (205.8 KB, 1536x2048, HTwB9rhWYAA1oJ2.jpg)

Piteå Bern, Bern 10/04/26 (Sun) 15:44:43 No. 302398 [PM]

y would it need to have ending or some solutions or suggestions ?

'k Meppel, Drenthe 10/04/26 (Sun) 15:56:16 No. 302399 [PM]

File: 1791129375705-0.jpg (1.4 MB, 1312x1986, g_14625178 - 6b74f75e2cdbc….jpg)

>>302398
Well, because thats wat you would expect I guess. The book describes hyperpolitics, which is widespread politization without affect to political change. Wat I want to say is that description by its own is not really useful, in a sense that opinion is needed to get some sense of the intent or the point of it all. So, I would prefer for it to have some kind of conclusion where some thoughts are expressed, but it ends on a "I have no idea wat to do about it" note, in short, in a kinda demoralized tone, kinda defeatist. Or maybe Im misunderstanding or not getting something important here, any way, after reading it I can only describe something and not really think of it as it applies to world, so, if it was clear how could it be applied, or in this case medicated, then I guess it would be more interesting but because it only describes it is incomplete

Piteå Bern, Bern 10/04/26 (Sun) 16:12:03 No. 302403 [PM]

File: 1791130322565.jpg (112.55 KB, 850x1202, 1778997282668508.jpg)

>>302399
yeh got that much from wiki synopsis. i just mean it's not really his place to offer suggestions. he could, there's many solutions, he could offer some too, but it's just more intellectually honest and objective for him not to, instead of taking the opportunity to push the few solutions that satisfy his own values or feels the most. or maybe he did exactly dat, but chose to de-emphasise it for same reasons

well anyway it's admirable u read so much fact instead of fiction. other readers @ staffas would stand to benefit from same. u have silly argumentation habits sometimes, but day by day more impressive corpus to back it up w/

'k Meppel, Drenthe 10/04/26 (Sun) 16:31:40 No. 302406 [PM]

File: 1791131500547-0.jpg (146.28 KB, 2000x2000, g_14554592 - 95f3e2327253e….jpg)

>>302403
I dunno wat you want to say, but no scholar is forbidden from having an opinion and value of scholarship is in opinion any way. Its not like Hyperpolitics is neutral, it is not at all, it doesnt pretend to. Its a good book but a let down in some respects, but I guess it is fair for him to do it any way as his book can enable discussion and stuff. So, yeah, if you actually read it you would understand

Eh, dunno, if I could read fiction I would already but I struggle to read even Kafka. Well, I argument the way I do to avoid vagueness, so I argue about wat I know and understand and dont argue against something I dont really know or not understand. Wat I wanted to say is that Im confident in wat I say and wouldnt say much if I werent. In fact, my argumentation device is really good, not only in being annoying but also in being not vague. So, you could say, that I get more powerful day by day… but this power doesnt express itself in any meaningful way, so, I actually get weaker. You must be getting more powerful too, by reading I mean