Is this book correct? Can Deleuze be read as redpillian?

>>21927896 (OP)

Yes. Deleuze was a huge influence on Land

>>21927896 (OP)

Yes.

>>21927896 (OP)

Does anyone have the audiobook ?

Land is bluepilled

>>21927896 (OP)



Redpillian is the gayest term I've ever heard. ... The most retarded people in the whole world are attached to the "red pill", which a trope that comes from a Hollywood movie. ... So yes, Deleuze, a bourgeois nihilist, certainly can

Imagine going through life



"Is that based?



Or is that cringe?



Tell me bros, tell me Chad, is this based?

>>21927896 (OP)

no, land abandon's deleuze for a reason, this book is complete cope that bastardizes all of deleuze's concepts and does not sufficiently account for guattari's influence on deleuze's thought. they were both communists and the fact that deleuze never completed the grandeur of marx is a genuine tradgedy

>tradgedy

But it's written by Murphy not Land.

Been quite some time since I've read this one so I may be not giving the most precise opinion. 



If we overlook the obvious cringe stuff like calling it based Deleuze we find an alternative reading of Gilles D. that is at least somewhat fresh. 

Reading all kinds of meaning and interpretations into writers that are kinda hard or impossible to decipher is very common (see Hegel) and it is very much needed for Deleuze in my opinion since most stuff is full on leftist id-pol. Now to some extend that is to be expected since Gilles and especially Felix G. where quite the lefties themselves but these terms today and at the time D&amp;G wrote seem to be very different.

If I remember right then Murphy made the connection of Deleuzes catholic upbringing and connecting certain values that could be interpreted as traditional. I don't remember it clearly but it seemed like a very big stretch most of the time to me. 



Deleuze today would have, in my opinion, quite a few points on which he would absolutely disagree with the majority of the talking points the left theory crowd have. Notably the prevalence of very strict identity politics, current handling of transgender issues backed by big pharma and the general direction of the psychological field (he might have hated Freud and his Ödipal complex, but that was nothing compared to the industrialization of "mental health"). 

Does that make him a based and redpilled reactionary? Absolutely not and even if Murphy is actively trying to troll with this book it still falls flat as an alternative reading on Deleuze.

>>21927896 (OP)

did Justin write anything interesting since his Greta post? i always just see him shilling for Urbit and that's it

His recent Mussolini-posting was nice and edge.

True, only autogynephiles are allowed to distort these two authors.

Broke

>based Deleuze

Bespoke 

>hermetic Deleuze

Stonk

>??? Deleuze



Tell me the Deleuze reading you want to see in the future.

you have to be a retard to think any thinker after the secular enlightenment is worth reading

I know there is a book out there called Dark Deleuze

>>21927896 (OP)

to me, it sounds like a book he wrote in a weekend just for the title to sell a couple hundred of copies and never be read

how many "Based X" books could i pop-out in a weekend if i use ChatGPT?

Fourty-five, approximately.

It sucks.

>>21927896 (OP)

Being red pilled isn't a good thing, it's arguably worse than being blue pilled. The purple pill and black pill are also cringe. Just think for yourself and stop being a gay little faggot.

kek
