Is chud cannon actually good or is it a meme
Will somebody please define chud for me? I have been away from the internet for a while, the last slur I remember is “dindu”.
>>25633310Chud is a fucking retard that believes in conspiracy theories and other retarded things of alt-right. Please, ignore /pol/tardposting.
>>25633310Look at the mirror.
>>25633310It's all in the physiognomy of the word, anon. A chud is a chud. A certain sort of male loser.
>>25633310Socially inept alt right retard is what it means these days. It can be used for loud/rude/stupid/aggressive mainstream rigtists as well, maybe not as correctly. There was (maybe still is, but not here) an effort by those types of people to claim the word as their own and use it proudly but it didn't take. Current usage was established around 2020 according to Know Your Meme. Originally it was taken from a B horror movie called CHUD (Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dweller) but that association has been completely lost in current use.
>>25633341lefty chuds exist
Chud is that alt right wojak doodle, but built like The Fridge and grilling or some other such masculine activity.>>25633341This anon isn't completely wrong, but being called a "chud" has about the same social impact now as being called racist. Just another slur ironically generated by the people that say they don't like slurs, or that slurs only count if they're tied to some sort of genetic quality: race, sex, unless you're transsexual, which the caveat of sexual orientations being a candidate for space under their moral umberella neatly demonstrates their elastic rhetoric. Its just more dead kulaks in the end. Charismatic authority very easily turns another person into an 'other' worthy of death. The troubling thing today is that the charismatic authority is held by a sort of egregore that drifts unaffixed on the internet.
>>25633310>I have been away from the internet for a whilePrison?Anyway, pic related is the visual representation. It's a wojak variant modeled after 2019 El Paso mass shooter Patrick Crasius.
>>25633306Depends. If it's magical/spritual vibe slop than it belongs in the trash. It's as retarded as astrology, if not more so. Start believing that shit and soon you will have a home filled with shungite rocks like a retard.
>>25633370>le slippery slope maymay
>>25633375You can only listen to so many right wing chuds talk about warhammer 40k chaos gods and Evola in the same sentence before you realise this type of stuff just draws in absolute retards.
>>25633393Fair enough. Your observation is amusing, but it's still fallacious.
>>25633393sounds fun tbqh
>>25633399No, it's not. It's accurate and you are human flotsam.
>>25633399Either extremely ESL or extremely retarded, or, I suppose, both.
>>25633406have you even read the book this thread is about?
Pendulum just swung back. Time to crawl back in your holes chuds.
>>25633411so the left are no longer the scrappy underdogs, but instead the privileged and powerful class?
>>25633310bioleninist lingo for having a regular number of chromosomes
>>25633347The term "lefty chud" makes sense but if you just say "chud" it's someone on the right.
>>25633407>extremely ESLExplain what's grammatically incorrect, without equivocating or relying on ad hom.>>25633406Prove me wrong. Unless, of course, you can't. ;)
>>25633357Name calling is rarely effective in any meaningful way. It is generally especially ineffective if it's left leaning people trying to do it, because on the left you're supposed to be above it, so even if someone agrees with your interpretation is also probably disapproving of your rhetoric to some degree.
>>25633413Always should have been, never were, aren't now, were always and still are pictured that way by the right.
>>25633437>It is generally especially ineffective if it's left leaning people trying to do it
>>25633443Do you honestly not view 'lefty' leadership as being every bit as privileged as right wing? The state gets bigger and the rich get richer.
>>25633443you're saying they never were the scrappy underdogs? Agreed that was always weird posturing on their part
>>25633445As far as leadership goes, the main difference is if you're on the left you have to pretend you actually care in your heart, and some of them do. Roy Cohen could only have ever been on the American right.
>>25633466>can't even spell his name right
There is no chud canon. I don't want to sound racist, but most chuds today are Hispanic, and they don't read; they just watch anime and spam the internet.
>>25633475>most chuds today are HispanicThis is the funniest part about the entire phenomenon.
>>25633451Same anon here. The left has always been the underdog politically in America. The only times they've really been scrappy has been aligned with some unionization efforts but the scrappiness has never more than regional and temporary. I'm on the left but I'm the sort of leftist that thinks we should start firebombing owner's houses again and excise a lot of the gentle mollycoddlers from what positions of power they currently have politically within our side of things. Probably most of the left leaning people who post here are like me -- our focus is material, not ideological. I don't care if someone is trans or black or gay, what I care about is if they are inert, cowardly, and/or self defeating in getting a better material life for themselves and for people like them.
>>25633472Nobody really cares if I spelled his name right, you fag.
>>25633477>the least judaized and demoralized race in the West are chudsProbably the most flattering slur next to antisemetic. "Chud" really is a low bar, yet many /lit/izens fail to clear it. The lack of effort glows.
>>25633310It’s basically anyone who has a normal male’s opinions and viewpoints from 50 years ago going back to the beginning of history. Plato, Homer, Hesiod, basically any of the authors of the western canon would all be considered “chuds” under the modern use of the term because they would call globohomo what it is just like “chuds” do. Having an overweight mutant-ugly leftist freak call you a chud in 2026 just means you’re a normal guy nowadays.
>>25633429Nothing that contravenes a rule of textbook grammar. Just clunky phrasing; hits off as unnatural. A first-language English speaker would only write what you did for some special purpose or reason (e.g. trolling or insecure about their ability to write). And no, there's no way for me to "prove" its incorrectness, other than to elicit agreement from other native English speakers.See Cavell's Must We Mean What We Say
>>25633370I'm mainly interested in what Evola has to say about aristocracy, I'm not really looking for metaphysics of any kind and I'm interested in his ideas about "riding the tiger" during the period of nihilism. I've also read some Guenon which was pretty good.
>>25633466That man really does seem like he was an awful awful bloke. I leant about him just the other day fromhttps://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v48/n19/deborah-friedell/in-the-public-closet
>>25633517I think it's less ESL and more a demonstration of someone having taken Eng 101 at Reddit U, or one of its satellite institutions (comment bars on 'intellectual' social media posts). I agree with you though as far as anon's post having a flavor that does not feel organic.>>25633466If you really believe there are sincere politicians on either side in America, I think the best thing for you to do is to cut off all news media consumption for a month.>>25633489I guess with left we euphemize Marxism? Both parties are Marxist at this point in terms of moving toward centralization, and centralization should always be viewed as a negative by humans. We aren't colony creatures. We aren't Bene Tleilaxu.
>>25633544>We aren't Bene Tleilaxu>obligatory reference to genre fictionChuds just can't help themselves.
>>25633544I didn't say they were sincere. I said the left has to project an image of sincerity. I do think some of them are sincere and that others are not, but you cannot do what Trump does and be on the left, you do not have the freedom to just take the mask off from time to time and go "yeah well fuck you I don't care."
>>25633535He was a real piece of work, that's for sure. Undeniably powerful, undeniably villainous.
>>25633517I am not AI. I swipe text and do some minimal editing efforts before posting -- often this makes my posts worse because it sometimes injects incongruities into my sentences that I then either don't catch or else post as is because I don't care that much and am ready to move on to another post. Those two things together are producing the unnatural phrasing and errors which you are honestly paying way too much attention to.
>>25633489>I'm the sort of leftist that thinks we should start firebombing owner's houses again and excise a lot of the gentle mollycoddlers from what positions of power>I don't care if someone is trans or black or gay, what I care about is if they are inert, cowardly, and/or self defeating in getting a better material life for themselves and for people like them.Suicidally based.
>>25633517>And no, there's no way for me to "prove" its incorrectnessI accept your defeat.>>25633544>I think it's less ESL and more a demonstration of someone having taken Eng 101 at Reddit U, or one of its satellite institutions (comment bars on 'intellectual' social media posts). I agree with you though as far as anon's post having a flavor that does not feel organic.
>>25633572Knowing what to say when cannot be schematized. The only critical response is to say, apparently dogmatically, that what is said is incorrect, in the extreme nonsensical, anyway out of place, so long as I am a native speaker. This has been well worked out by Austin and his followers e.g. Cavell.>>25633561So, retarded, then.
>>25633551>I said the left has to project an image of sincerity"the left" has done a terrible job of this from the way they talk about poorer states and genuinely working class people
>>25633590Yes, but his point is, I think, that at least they feel forced to try.
>>25633597Yeah and my point is they don't try.Anon's pretty clearly coming from a stereotype-driven place of "republicans are straight-up vocally evil and heartless"
>>25633601Difficult to think otherwise with Roy Cohn, Trump's once-right-hand-man, in mind.
>>25633604Trump was a Democrat while Roy Cohn was his lawyer lmao
>>25633610And? Not like he had any success, or influence, as a Democrat; it was clearly for his own gain. He has swapped parties many times, and only found success on the right.
>>25633547You understood it though, didn't you, nigger?
>>25633622so it's not clear what your point is at all by this point. Trump's kept switching parties but ideologically he's basically been a 90's democrat
>>25633551I'm trying to maintain the decorum of a proper /lit/izen here but you are profoundly head fukt if you think there's any sort of sincerity in U.S. politics rn... I can maybe concede that there's pretend sincerity. There's nowhere in the world where "politics as a vocation" applies to quite the same degree as it does here in the states. The vocation is convincing people to vote for you. That really has nothing to do with sincerity, the involvement of sincerity is almost a system error at this point.
it's still in its early development stage but the chud cannon should be able to obliterate every major city in africa and india, yes, pretty good if you ask me
>>25633590I'm not sure what you think sincerity means. Both the left and the right fundamentally believe poorer rural states and the uneducated laboreres that make up their populations are a burden to the country. Being sincere means admitting that publicly, which the left does, but they do it in the frame of "we need to help these people out, so that they can see the light and effectively become educated urbanites like us." It's patronizing but a lot of them really mean it. My point is though that the other people on the left (who think more along the lines of country people being largely just irredeemable hicks who have to be tolerated during their lifetimes and the only worthwhile efforts in their department is trying to steer their kids away from their parents's backwardness) still have to outwardly pretend to care and help them. That the party itself will ostracize you if you don't present that way. On the right you can say you want to implement your policies because it will help everyone. You can also say a large body of your opponents base are the enemy, or subhuman and deserving of disenfranchisement at the least, and the party doesn't ostracize you. The party itself is ok with presenting as two faced this way, as openly hypocritical. You can be a real, accepted member of the right and be an openly cynical self serving manipulator. If you try that on the left you'll be booted. You must present as good hearted, you must present as sincere. On the right you must present as effective (even if you are not), but you don't have to seem good hearted and you don't have to seem sincere.
>>25633586>Knowing what to say when cannot be schematized. The only critical response is to say, apparently dogmatically, that what is said is incorrect, in the extreme nonsensical, anyway out of place, so long as I am a native speaker. This has been well worked out by Austin and his followers e.g. Cavell.
>>25633734>You can also say a large body of your opponents base are the enemyBoth sides do this blatantly
>>25633753>Doesn't respond because fearful of writing in English.
>>25633828>>Doesn't respond because fearful of writing in English.>Notice me, senpai!
>>25633757There's a huge disparity in this and you know it.
>>25633316I'm trans in case anyone cares btw.
>>25633904Yes there is. The label "Trump supporter" carries a stigma with it like no other "likes this president" in history.
>>25634364Guess you already forgot about the stuff you used to post in the Obama years, huh? Such a reasonable group you are, so full of restraint and good judgement.
>>25634377See, you're doing it right now. I only voted for Trump once, although many people would label me "Trump Supporter" still since I don't hate the guy, and that makes me the enemy. I genuinely don't see everybody who votes Democrat as my enemy but a lot of them do, more than ever.
>>25634386You're not the enemy. You're just deeply profoundly retarded and easily rooked by con men.
>>25634397That's enlightened of you to feel that way, but how many positively-portrayed Trump supporting characters are out there in literature or pop culture?
>>25634398Just stay away from the voting booth from now on kid. You arent built for it.
>>25634411You seem to be conceding my point that "trump supporters" are viewed as the enemy more than any other mainstream presidential supporters. So yeah, there is a huge disparity.
>>25633421bodied every tranny ITT
>>25633306Evola's alright as long as you realise you're reading what amounts to religious literature. I like his new and inventive racisms, myself. Revolt probably shouldn't be 'chud canon' but his Handbook should be. If only so you can pluck the bits out that make you think.
>>25634386You're not having this discussion in good faith. Try again next time.
>>25633341I identify as a chud but have a gf.
>>25633306Guys, Julius evola revolt against the modern world. This is the like most redpilled and most based book i literally ever read like, this is like gold like this is like so much anti-feminist anti-system anti like evil things you know like this book is gold and never ever miss this book, like revolt against the modern world.
>>25633310Chud is a fucking genius who sees through mainstream jewish propaganda and understands the truth behind things that others dismiss as conspiracy theories. Please, embrace /pol/CHADposting.
>>25634810pretty much how "chuds" describe it. the type of chuds who don't actually read the book, but want post-alt-right cred after seeing it posted or glibly references by some right-wing influencer.
>>25633310Meaningless now because all Gen Z and alpha call themselves chuds and chudpilled
>>25633306the whole point not just of evola but of the general instinct characterizing the ""right wing"" is to each its own, the race to the bottom and thus quantity of those to whom something appeals as measurement stick is integral to leftist discourse, not the former's; ergo is it good? depends on whom you ask, read it, if it's not your cup of tea that's entirely ok and in fact in line with the spirit of the book
>>25633517That is not how you use a semicolon.
>>25635135>to each its ownThat doesn't sound very authoritarian.
>>25635136It is abbreviated internet speak, still of the sort spoken by a fluent English speaker. Read, obviously, as "[It is] just clunky phrasing; [it] hits off as unnatural" the semicolon use is fine, connecting two related independent clauses. The point of the sentence was not to say that the target sentence hits off as unnatural because clunkily phrased, but is clunkily phrased and hits off as unnatural, hence the semicolon. But please, weigh in more.
>>25635161How many cocks have you sucked to completion, anon? Reply truthfully with your non-zero answer.
>>25635211Types or tokens?
>>25635161>Read, obviously, as "[It is] just clunky phrasing; [it] hits off as unnatural" the semicolon use is fine, connecting two related independent clauses.Not even the anon you’re bickering with but I knew this would be the reply before reading the post. This is cope for niggers too lazy to write a proper sentence. You aren’t in a novel.
>>25635367?
>>25633347I still remember how leftists popularized the term as a political description in online discourse by calling right wingers "chuds". They still keep to the etymology of chud meaning a right-winger on certain forums.The term "lefty chud" makes sense in the current mainstream cultural context, but to me it'll always feel wrong. It's like telling a Victorian man that "gay" means homosexual now.
>>25635211>>25635223Anyway the answer is only 1 (not my own), but many times.
>>25633508Why do rightists love writing self-victimizing schizo essays like this?
>>25633310CannibalisticHumanoidUndergroundDwellerThe first one is better, but Bud the Chud is still a good time. More appropriate for /tv/.
>>25633437Well, calling people chuds certainly hasn't worked. They've happily embraced itAnyways yes it was basically a non problematic, non ableist etc insult. So hilariously bad and dead in the water from the start.
>>25633306It's actually a very good book but it's almost impossible to have a discussion about it here or anywhere for that matter.
>>25636316>one paragraph is an essayKek. You’re one of those ugly freaks they mentioned aren’t you.
>chud cannon
>>25633306im not really the biggest fan of evola but in terms of "VGH RETVRN" he's basically what you're looking for. He's just too regressive for my tastes.In terms of actual chud canon I feel like it's varied. Seriously you can basically find a booklist for any ideology (idk if the wiki's back but there's a few there). You can find religious lists, conservative lists, lolbert lists, hell even a few revolutionary-right lists and some ecologist ones. Lot of stuff, not all of it is that good but it's interesting and a breath of fresh air if you approach it right.
>>25633310Is it you?
Fire the chud cannon!
>>25633489You're retarded. The left has won on every single issue. Donald Trump is basically a purple haired tranny. He's to the left of 2004 Obama on every issue. The left has done nothing but win for the last 200 years.Do you get cancelled for being left wing or right wing? Socialist or fascist? Anti white or anti brown? It's obvious who the overdogs and underdogs are
>>25637244So sick and tired of these nonsensical AI posts.
>>25633306I really liked Evola. And after him, I went back to the Greeks.I was able to go from a purely modernist and positivist mindset to being more accepting of metaphysics and theology. It started by saying "I'll just be open minded and try to believe that maybe they are right", and approaching it from that angle was very liberating from the old cemented views that modern society has ingrained in me from birth.I have been a visual artist most of my life and never wanted to learn philosophy. Preferring instead to keep those feelings vague and work them out in the moment.But I'm really happy that I've begun the journey and feel like I have even more "inner content" to express in my work now, as opposed to relying too much on aesthetics like I used to.I still like Evola and have a couple of his books on my shelf at all times for reference.
