/lit/ - Literature

>>23307917
Raskolnikov's thesis wasnt factually incorrect tho, he was just mistaken in his arrogant assumption that *he himself* was a morality-shattering world-moving ubermensch destined for greatness

>>21674418
Maybe I consider the discussion of modern church as it is a bit irrelevant since I dont see it as a possible force for either good or evil in my or anyones value system. Too powerless. I am more concerned with its detritus in the form of system of morality manifesting as varius leftist ideologies. Which you dont think could result as a producto christianity as it was in its inception but lets agree to disagee. At least we could converse without spergloid name calling like the rest. Very good. I wont be able to reply for some time now.
As a final side note I would consider ancien regime to be partially based in eugenic too (nietzsche also claims this)

>>21273339
Fate favors great men. They are given the opportunity to enact their great will on the world, through a combination of being in the right place at the right time and having the ability to seize such opportunity, because of acquired skills or innate talent.
Fate is different from just ordinary luck. Some men are born lucky - while they may never have their name go down in history, they are at least blessed with success and material wealth in their lifetime. Most people want to be "lucky", but I would not mind continuing to be downtrodden if it would contribute to this feeling I seek.
I don't necessarily want to be a great man, but I wonder if those such as Napoleon and Alexander and Michelangelo and Kant have come close to experiencing such feeling of meaning and catharsis as I described prior.

/pol/tards will always larp about how "might makes right" but refuse to acknowledge that every great conqueror in history was extremely educated (like Alexander, Napoleon, and Caesar) or was a gifted strategist despite a lack of education (like Genghis) that still used cunning and diplomacy to build their empires and still had respect for scholars (as long as they were loyal). Meanwhile brutes like niggers and Germanic barbarians were bound to be conquered or forced to adapt. /pol/'s #1 idol didn't care about his primary education, failed to get accepted into art school, and took credit for the genius of his generals but /pol/tards will unironically believe he singlehandedly conquered Europe by unlocking the mystical hyperborean spirit and creating an army of aryan supersoldiers. Every great empire was built by people who were educated and respected the humanities. Every great war was won by generals who were studious. The white man got his spot on top of the world because of his intellectualism. No amount of wignat larping will change that. The truth is that /pol/ is as niggerfied as the rest of the west so they worship raw nigger brute in white men rather than the strategic genius in white men that actually catapulted Europe to dominating the world. But if you tell a /pol/tard that they don't know what it actually means to be a white man, they will call you a nigger. Alexander the Great didn't conquer almost all of the known world by being a wignat /pol/tard barbarian. He did it by being a /lit/pilled white man.