The funny part is the only people who are going to read it are people who aren't the problem.

9-11 was an inside job

>>2707155

Rothstein detected

> stoplikingwhatidontlike.jpg.

Stay classy OP.

>>2707155

Upcoming recommended reading lists: economics and political economy for /new/, environmental politics for /new/, and the War on Terror for /new/

Meanwhile, I have a few books that I can upload for you guys. I have the Oxford edition of Machiavelli's The Prince, Clausewitz's On War, Stoessinger's Why Nations go to War, Waltz's Theory of International Politics, and Wendt's Social Theory of International politics immediately available for anyone who wants to download it. I may upload a few more books if anyone has a specific request.

>>2707176

>Machiavelli's The Prince

Do you realize he was trolling, right?
The entire books is overloaded with sarcasm, and every book he was written prior to that is the exact opposite of The Prince

I feel like something like this should be a group effort.

>>2707162

Hey, the overall quality of /new/ will still improve. Nothing can go wrong with this plan.

>>2707169

Who the fuck is Rothstein

>>2707172

I didn't say stop, by all means, continue reading "The Politically Incorrect Guide to X"

That's why I've suggested "recommended readings" and not "MANDATORY READINGS UNDER THE PAIN OF DEATH"

well OP, I know nobody on /v/ plays games, and no one on /tv/ watches TV or movies. So I really wouldnt be surprised if nobody on /a/ watched anime or people on /o/ didnt really drive cars.

>>2707203

> implying you're not buttmad about the level of trolling on /new/.

>>2707155

On your Marxism section:

I've heard Capital is a bit of a hard read. Is there anything one should read to prime themselves for it, so to speak?

i think infowars.com should be on your list

>>2707198

I can upload the text files (.docx) for anyone who wishes to collaborate. E-mail's in the field.

>>2707198

I don't believe The Prince is satire. A lot of stuff in The Prince is mirrored in The Discourses on Livy, and he actually did try to become a Prince himself by organizing a citizen militia. Didn't end well for him though.

Explain what's so bad about Chomsky

>>2707214

There are clearly people who are not trolling but genuinely hold very stupid beliefs

>>2707217

Communism: A Very Short Introduction is available on Demonoid and TPB I believe. You can also just read the Hackett selection of Marx's works which comes with a useful introduction and cuts out all the cruft.

>>2707244

How is that different from anywhere else in society, though?

Srsly OP, you're setting yourself something of a mountain to climb if you want to influence opinions on /new/.

Most of the time people here are just reactionary morons, at least if not trolls or somewhat intelligent individuals.

>>2707243

Chomsky is a brilliant linguist but a piss-poor political theorist

Gotta have something more substantive than "everything America does is wrong" and parroting a retard version of Marxist thought

>>2707244

>Communism: A Very Short Introduction is available on Demonoid and TPB I believe. You can also just read the Hackett selection of Marx's works which comes with a useful introduction and cuts out all the cruft.

Alright, thanks.

>>2707261

Even intelligent /new/fags and trolls can benefit from wider reading

>>2707268
So you believe America can do no wrong?

>>2707284

America sometimes does wrong and sometimes does right

>I included one proto-feminist and one feminist in the political theory document. DEAL WITH IT

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA *breath* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH ... HAHAHAHAHAHA ... Thats a good one...

>>2707295
But still, you believe that this "sometimes wrong, sometimes right" concept is objective reality?
That it is absolutely impossible for America to be completely wrong?

>>2707301

You should really read Christine de Pizan's book. It'll make you burst a blood vessel.

>>2707345

As a Kantian, there are many things that the American state does which are completely wrong. But that's holding it to such a high standard that the whole world looks very evil. To put things in perspective, I believe there is a continuum of moral goodness and badness in the real world, but since we cannot peer into the soul into another human being, much less the souls of all those who operate the state functions of the USA, I cannot say whether any particular action was 100% wrong.

If we look at things from a structural realist's point of view, then you can make such differentiations. The invasion and occupation of Iraq was very close to 100% wrong, because it was a waste of American power and damaged American interests. The purpose of the American government is to serve Americans, and thus it has utterly failed on that respect.

>if nobody drove cars on /o/ and tried to discuss that

I'm guessing you've never been to /o/