/lit/ - Literature

>>10043026
HAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHA, CONSERVATIVE VALUES HAVE HISTORICAL PRECEDENCE. WHAT DID LIBERAL VALUES ACHIEVE? WOMEN VOTING POWER? DON'T NEED IT.

right? I can't imagine being so edgy that I share the same political belief as my dad and my grandfather

>>10043026
Why would I give a fuck about the ideology that destroyed marriage and lead to being raised by a single mom?

>>10043026
Don't worry comrade, they'll pay for their sins.

>>10043038
Your poor mother.

holding values that are thousands of years old? yeah thats so fucking rebellious.

When your prose gets better. That first sentence is so poorly formulated that anyone used to reading the good stuff immediately winges between "conservatism" and "to be." The comma splice in the second sentence is equally atrocious and something told me that it was all going to come together because something as juvenal as "I'm fucking sick of it all" totally ties your entire garbage thread together.

>waaah waaaah why can't we live in the 60's forever?
>waaah waaah why can't I be edgy while preaching normie shit like free love
here's a picture of isis killing a gay man for you, I masturbate to it everyday

>>10043026
>posts zizek
As for my opinion? Vanity of vanities. You know what's refreshing about the doctrine of original sin? It reminds you that most human failings are universal.

I think the easiest way to spot someone blinded by ideology is to insult a particular notion (such as feminism, conservatism etc...)

The ones who will incessentally defend a notion of ideas (that's to say the ideology) over the ideas themselves are clearly the ones who haven't developed these ideas themselves, rather they defend them because they have inherited them through said ideology.

tl;dr if you get triggered because someone insults an ideology or political view then you should really re-evaluate why you care so much, and if you're really such a "free thinker" after all

>>10043067
Only conservatives don't hold onto values which are "thousands of years old". Just consider what most describe themselves as: "Classical Liberals", after the sort of people who were considered radical in their day.

Imagine being so edgy you don't want to burn your society you live in to the ground.

>>10043097
>be a fucking retard and mislabel a group of people
>draw a fucking retarded conclusion

>conservatives thinking they are edgy
>when they don't even want to rape children
they are so, ugh, silly
let's laugh at them, comrades!

>>10043097
>Only
Rather, values are a mish-mash and self-identification, or group identification, can only give you a partial sense of the truth. American conservatives are trying to conserve an essentially liberal political tradition. Conservatives, radicals, reactionaries, populists, reformists - these are all contextual labels, with only a few connotations that can be applied universally.

Everyone should have a little more insouciance with regards to these terms. The less personal significance, the better. Learning the history of ideas is sobering, and liberating.

>>10043107
Do you even know what conservatism is? Are you sure you're not a reactionary?

>Conservatives are under the misapprehension that those aspects of society which are good and hard-fought for, are in fact eternal (probably God-given), and it is foolish to try and improve on them
>Traditionalists/reactionaries feel that those aspects of society which are good and hard-fought for, are in fact eternal (certainly God-given), and it is high treason to try and improve on them c. 1600 A.D.

>He's still a /pol/fag
>He isn't a communist to be contrarian to his parents, peers and even contrarian to 4chan

Get a load of this, pleb.

>>10043114
>do you even know

He asks after calling classical liberals conservatives.

>>10043110
>conservative and reactionary are contextual labels
of course I am a socialist! that's because I want the best for society as a whole! :)

>>10043119
>Get a load of this, pleb.
You have one too many commas.

>>10043120
Still not seeing anything more than outrage from you. You must be a very angry anon.

>>10043119
>not falling for the nazbol meme
never gonna make it

>>10043119
>being a commie is contrarian
maybe if you are american and never went to college
here in south america everybody is a communist, not even exaggerating

>>10043121
How can they not be? They are dependent on time, place, on what people are involved. They are not really ideologies, but sentiments, or persuasions. The term Socialism more resembles Christianity, because it is more intentional, more dogmatic; so it's easier to mislabel someone or something as socialist or Christian for superficial reasons. And being a Christian or a Socialist doesn't rely too much on context, wherever you go historically and geographically they are going to share a lot of agreeable essential traits.

>>10043126
I was telling the pleb to get a load of my hot uniqueness.

I was not telling an unspecified audience to get a load of the pleb.

>>10043132
NazBol is pretty contrarian. But WATCH THIS.

>>10043133
Here in Europe everyone is either a SocDem that thinks they're radical or a plain old classcuck.

>he actually thinks that speculating on other people's human right is a-okay
>he says things like "these people should be oppressed, these people should be gassed" without noticing how disgustingly arrogant it is for a basement dweller to start deciding who gets to stay in his country and who doesn't
>all of his arguments have to completely discount morality and ethics for them to be considered acceptable
>his entire education comes from /pol/ infographics (stormfront propaganda)
>when he is opposed on the internet he immediatly assumes that he is debating jews or SJWs

>>10043026
take it to /pol/ buddy

>>10043174
I think the problem with anti-/pol/ memes of this type is attempting to be funny in an irreverent vein while also being a prudish moraliser. You could moralise, and still be funny, but it would have to be humane, not sterile, forced and contemptuous.

>>10043026
>meme

the first french and italian fascists were literally disaffected marxists who refused to sell out to democratic socialism. it was as countercultural and avant-garde as any other revolutionary movement. rejecting shit is the entire point of the whole thing. all politics is reactionary, and primarily aesthetic. nothing strange is happening, we just have a way to smell everyone's dumb bullshit now because of the internet.

Reactionaries certainly seem to be under the impression that they're edgy.

>>10043133
Oh but you are exaggerating. Maybe in universities and exclusively in the humanities courses, but not in general. At least here in br br hue, the herd mentality of the common people is still a conservative one.

If you're older than 16, and aren't conservative, then you're a fucking moron and your father failed in raising you.

>>10043201
PJW obviously writes for teens, it's just normal that he sounds retarded if you are 18+, but he knows what he's doing

>>10043210
>past year + 1
>father
that's not how it works anymore

>>10043184
Typical /pol/ tactic: when the critique is spot on, attack the way in which it's formulated, and treat the content of the critique itself as pedantic common sense.
The result of this tactic? /pol/ can't be criticized, since every possible form of criticism will design you as a boring loser. It should also be noted that this strategy is entirely reliant on the affinity that 4chan has for edgyness: for example, as you can see in this case, the character of a poster, or the contents of his ideas become an afterthought, something that is only barely relevant compared to how funny is the post to /pol/ users.

>>10043210
Conservativism is the less ethical option.

What if I just don't really care about social politics or justice and just want to sit at home reading books about people who eat metal to perform magic or elves and dwarves or some other fantasy shit?

>>10043067
>1950s values are 1000s of years old

>>10043229
Less ethical how?

When you say "conservative" what do you mean by that?
Seriously, what do you think conservative means?
I like the nation state and I think marriage should be a bond between a man and a woman. I also think that there are only two genders. Yet I also support gay and trans rights, but I find it hard to be vocal about it, since the current climate is full of transtrenders and retards who fight against every sibgle tradition and belief western countries are built upon. I like capitalism, but I also like the idea of a social safety net. I recognise the large global companies as a danger to the freedom of the common people, but I don't like big governments either.
I hate controlled economy and the fact that our current system is based upon debt. I don't like global institutions like EU or UN, I see them as a danger to the nation state.
I'd like the healthcare system to be more privatized, but I'm not sure how we could move out of the public sector.
I think free speech should be absolute, only DIRECT calls of violence should be punished and silenced. I'm for controlled migration of people who are ready to integrate into the country, take up the values of the nation and see themselves as a citizen of that nation first and foremost, before any other identity.
What am I?
My mother has called me a right winger, mostly because of my free speech ideals.
Can you even categorise me to any neat box?
See, when you start to categorising people to right or left, you lose all nuance that persons opinions might have. It's not useful for discussion.

Leftists were a mistake

>>10043232
>le everything is social construct meme
let me guess family is a bourgeois concept too right

>>10043234
shut up Dave Rubin

conservatives are the new wave of retards pretending to carve a place of self importance by seeming special. the true patrician concerns himself only with truth, and this, at a politicall level falls closer to a liberal, social democratic interpretation. Especially with regard to rights, healthcare, taxation, and most importantly foreign policy. Hence if you fall closer to liberal values you are a philosopher and if not, a baffoon. But it's hard not to be on the disadvantageous locus of historic cultural change. In a few years conservatism will become the norm and liberalism the edgy ideology with growing popularity. The fact remains though that the true intelectual sides more with liberalism than conservatism, and does not concern himself with the aesthetic cycle of popular opinion.

based falseflagteens

>>10043233
I don't want to oppress black people, women and gender freaks. Free markets turns disgraces and predatory practices into cashcows. The relevance of capital turns governmenrs into policy markets for investors and international conglomerates, whcih, by following the dictates of conservstivism are now destroying workers' rights, reducing man into a dumbed down (by demeaning culture that frolicks due to the now established connection between free global markers and Art) shadow of his potential self.

>>10043142
Not only was Pol Pot right, but Stalin did nothing wrong.

>>10043251
The nuclear family most certainly is.

>>10043268
yes, but the nuclear family is shit and already a degenerated concept. the extended family is the only construct that actually works and doesn't alienate everybody involved

>>10043026
It absolutely is reactionary because leftism has been forced by the media

>>10043276
It's still a social construct though.

>that actually works
If it works it wouldn't have faded away into the nuclear family, and subsequently single parent households. We've a point where economics are totally hostile to all but the most atomized concepts of family and there's no turning back on that one short of an apocalyptic event.

>>10043276
The nuclear family is human nature and is the most healthy

>>10043234
>I like the nation state and I think marriage should be a bond between a man and a woman
What about civil unions? Should they be banned too?

>I also think that there are only two genders.
By definitiom this is false, unless you are dishonestly equating gender and biological sex.

>since the current climate is full of transtrenders and retards who fight against every sibgle tradition and belief western countries are built upon.
Some of them are obnoxious so fuck their entire cause?

>I'd like the healthcare system to be more privatized, but I'm not sure how we could move out of the public sector.
More privatized? Why?

>only DIRECT calls of violence should be punished and silenced
It never works against fascism.

>My mother has called me a right winger, mostly because of my free speech ideals.
Centrist leaning to the right. More in general, someone who does not care about other people's human rights unless their cause is aesthetically pleasing, a typical fascist trait according to Walter Benjamin and Adorno.

>>10043288
>He thinks The Flintstones is a documentary about prehistoric people.

>>10043232
Things like 2 genders and roles of women

>>10043301
Its proven no matter how much you deny it

>>10043026
It won't. After going through HS being forced to fit in, young people want to be special and stand out, counterculture always existed and will always exist, and it's not that bad. Questioning the status quo is always good, even if you answer are /pol/ memes, as long the person is still open to learn. Most will grow out of it when lived enough to gain more perspectives and experiences. Just watch them rebel and play along, or don't. It doesn't matter. In 10-20 years they will be boring ass centrists.

>>10043234
>Can you even categorise me to any neat box?
Basic bitch right winger with some undercooked contrasting views (the business shit). You'd probably vote for the Torys/UKIP.

>>10043257
>social democratic
Are just conservatives light these days. Look what SPD became.

McCarthy was right

>>10043224
Your seriousness has rendered you almost as paranoid as a /pol/ack.
Pic related, something I made to shit on /pol/'s holocaust denial. You just seem wounded, and desperate. You're why /pol/ says "the left can't meme." It's not that you should be flippant - there's something indescribably sour about you. The way Communists on the internet try to outmatch /pol/'s edginess by going on about muh kulaks muh Stalin did nothing wrong - it's both ressentiment and cruel puerile imitation. The thing about Nazis is its so far beyond forgivability its jarring morality almost becomes plausible.

Maybe I'm just too much of an Anglo. Too much of an Australian.
Switch tactics

>>10043210
Seconding this. Altho id blame culteral marxism

>>10043287
>It's still a social construct though.
what is even your point
when everything is a social construct, being a social construct is not a bad thing
>hurr extended families are bad because they are social constructs
>therefore muh gay families are as good as them

>>10043232
>powerful pelple enslave the masses with deceitful narratives, while hoarding as many resources as possible for themselves, their family and those people who help him enforce his authority
>said people strive for power and wealth, and have very little consideration for the value of human lives (think about the omnipresent obusiness of war)

Seems like the same old story with different characters, gadgets and gimmicks.

>>10043302
>2 genders is thousands of years old
True. But additional genders are also thousand of years old.
>the roles of women are thousands of years old
In the most abstract and vague sense possible, which would by and large translate to the subservience of women to men. Otherwise the roles of women have been just a flexible and transient as the roles of men, they morph to suit the economic necessities of the time.

>>10043311
>>10043224

Nice deconstructions.

>>10043026
Its a sign of maturity. Leftism is quite literely a mental disorder if you are over a certain agel

>>10043315
>being a social construct is not a bad thing
It doesn't mean bad, it means that it's not something to take too seriously, since it's a meme one can always adjust.

>>10043287
>If it works it wouldn't have faded away into the nuclear family
yeah it's almost as if good things can be affected by historical processes too, right?

>>10043306
That the Flintstones is a documentary and cavemen actually did live with one cave dad, one cave mom, 2.5 cave kids and a cave dog?

>economics: liberal ideology
>academia: liberal and post-left ideology

yes, how dare one adopt a conservative or nationalist position!!

Three words
Get a job

>>10043184
The problem here is that /pol/ memes are so over the top, you can't deal with them with normal memes beyond complete reflection like "gulag them all" or hyper satyrical by taking their shit at face value and pretending to go with it with even more enthusiasm, which would be pretty confusing for a normal person.

>>10043276

>starting a healthy family is bad because my professor Mr. Goldbergstein told me it is!

God damn, how is it even possible to be this bluepilled?
This is your brain on Jewish Marxist indoctrination, folks.
Is everyone on this shithole 14?
Coming on here just makes my blood boil. /mu/ is even smarter than you guys and they're a bunch of drooling retards who worship Kanye.

>>10043315
My point is that since it's a social construct it's not an immutable fact of reality that we have to accept. It is subject to debate and possibly (in fact inevitably) change if we come to decide a different social construct would suit us better.

>therefore muh gay families are as good as them
Woah, buddy. I'm a futurist fascist who thinks all children should be raised communally by the state. In that case there's only one family and everyone is part of it.

>>10043287
>>If it works it wouldn't have faded away into the nuclear family
Well, now the nuclear family model is fading. What's your point? If your argument is based on utility and suitability why the hell are you defending this institution?

>>10043234
You're an idiot and your mother hates you.

Read >>10043295
He actually responded to your inanity with something thoughtful.

>>10043338
>Coming on here just makes my blood boil.
You're always free to go back, you know.

>>10043276
>doesn't alienate everybody involved
What about women who do not want to live as subservient wives?

>>10043026
Because I want to follow the traditions of my people without my culture being destroyed in the name of social justice

>>10043338
Go. Away.

>>10043349
Good goy

>>10043328
I don't think you understand my point. It's not that it never worked, it's that the economic conditions that made the extended family obsolete are still in place. We can't just try to resurrect it as a social institution while we still have the economic framework that killed it, it would quickly develop back into the nuclear family.

Likewise there was a time swords worked great for fighting battles, now that would just get you shot and the army would go back to using guns.

>>10043338
You are right, dont listen to the minority of trolls

>>10043340
I literally mentioned that the nuclear family is fading into single-parent households in the following part of that same sentence. I don't know why you brought that up unless you're trying to misrepresent my point.

> If your argument is based on utility and suitability why the hell are you defending this institution?
What institution?
Do you think I'm defending the nuclear family?

>>10043343


>y-yeah w-well just go back to your containment board!!

This mindset is why liberals will keep losing. When faced with a challenge, you just give in and pussy out.
You call /pol/ an echo chamber, yet you people are afraid of even the most slightly dissenting opinions that challenge your precious worldview.

But hey, don't take my advice. I like my enemy uninformed and arrogant. It just makes it easier.

>>10043346
these are a mere social construct of modern feminism
these kind of women are useless and only do not want to accept their subservient nature because they are resentful

>>10043026
>tfw you're traditionalist left-wing (i.e. anti-capitalist, care deeply about social issues, helping the oppressed, but have traditionalist moral views on sex, life, duty, etc.)

Seriously though, everyone I know thinks I'm on their side politically. I've somehow accidentally become a political chameleon

>>10043351
At this point you're wallowing on unfounded ideal speculations. You're talking about nothing.

>>10043327
>It doesn't mean bad, it means that it's not something to take too seriously, since it's a meme one can always adjust.
something being a social construct doesn't mean you have the capacity to improve on it, that's the key failure of the left, they will rant about material conditions but will never take responsibility for the material consequences of their actions.

>>10043338
You're clearly an idiot because the guy you're responding to is a reactionary that wants to go back to the extended family, which is what we had before the nuclear family.

>>10043354
Like shooting fish in a barrel

>>10043359
Explain why.

>>10043351
>economic determinism

>>10043363
It is frankfurt school lies

>>10043355
>these kind of women are useless and only do not want to accept their subservient nature because they are resentful
Are you going to argue this thesis or what? And on what ground are you assuming that you have the knowledge and the authority to make such claims? Why shouldn't I treat you as a megalomaniac lunatic?

>>10043354
lol youre a faggot traditionalist, go larp a WW2 officer elsewhere

>>10043338
are you retarded? the nuclear family is already a concept to slave you, you fucking retard. a mother living alone with her kids in a flat in a grey city with no social support except a bunch of bills that her husband brings from time to time to the house is not natural in any way and has never existed historically until the industrial revolution.

the extended family, the tribe, is the real traditional one, no one woman should ever have to raise kids alone, heck, after the third kid they should pretty much raise each other and stop bugging you.

>>10043364

>Epicly trolled! I was merely pretending to be retarded!

>>10043354
>being concerned for your mental health
>DIS IS WHY DA LIBRULS LOSE
You really should just go back. This isn't good for you, anon, as you were self-aware enough just a minute ago or so to point out. Time to take the next logical step.

>>10043377
Diseases are natural too. Surely you wouldn't take medicine and visit a doctor to go against mother nature like some progressive cuck?

>>10043346
in the traditional family wives are not subservient, they have their own social circle where they occupy a position of their own? women not working is just a modern meme, that never existed historically except for very rich women.

women raising kids alone is also a post-industrial meme, the whole social group raised kids communally and supported women traditionally

>>10043339
being subject to change != you are able to decide the changes

>>10043354
Not him, but your previous post >>10043338 wasn't really a challenge, was it? It was a typical "oh why do I come here?" rant. And I think you have to ask yourself that seriously - just why do you come here?

>>10043377

>no one woman should ever have to raise kids alone
Roastie detected.

Women were raising their own children for hundreds of thousands of years.
It's only in the last 50-60 years that that dynamic has changed.
It's also partly why women are fucking crazy.

If more women were stay at home moms like they were meant to be instead of LARPing as strong businesswomen in pantsuits, then a lot more of them would be happy.

>>10043357
>anti-capitalist, care deeply about social issues, helping the oppressed, but have traditionalist moral views on sex, life, duty
that's not left-wing brofloskvsy, that's textbook far-right opinions

>>10043385
Come on, you know what he means by unnatural: it's something that never happened before, whoch makes parents miserable while ruining the youth.
Are you really going to be apologetic for THAT?

>>10043385
we are already having to import new people from societies that have more traditional extended families because the current western family structure is not sustainable

maybe we will be able to save it technologically, but unless the government starts putting artificial wombs to raise the next generation i don't see how

>>10043398
>it's something that never happened before
Like advanced medicine? People rarely even survived birth, now every retard from some crack addict mom has a solid chance. Times changes, society change, whatever happened before is irrelevant.

>>10043393
Not necessarily. But you can always give it a shot.

Or more realistically you could consider the economic framework that is leading to these social issues, and then change that in order to alleviate them.

>>10043395
>If more women were stay at home moms like they were meant to be instead of LARPing as strong businesswomen in pantsuits, then a lot more of them would be happy.
You are absolutely divorced from reality. As if most mothers work because they want to: fucking ridicolous. Do you realize that women account for 50% of our workforce? To how many cases do you think your examples applies (and try to keep in mind the distribution of wealth im the US)?

This is what you get when you get educated by youtube talking heads.

>>10043401
>because the current western family structure is not sustainable
What is current western family structure? Where is the data proving it's not sustainable?

I'm waiting for the meme of the United States having anything but "democrat" and "republican" to stop. Look at your driver's license to tell what you are, if you've really gotten that stupid.

>>10043402
You can't see the difference between the dehumanization of humanity and child surgery? Also is this how you think in general? You just accept whatever happens, and you defend it until it stops happening? Are you entirely driven by the status quo?

>>10043398
>Come on, you know what he means by unnatural: it's something that never happened before
The first time someone took aspirin it wasn't natural, but the second time it was?

Well, I suppose by your "logic", the second time someone stuck a gerbil up their ass it was all part of the natural order, just like procreation, flying on an aeroplane or making yourself look like a fool on the internet.

>>10043395
>Women were raising their own children for hundreds of years
Not on their own. They had the child's grandparents, aunts possibly cousins all living in the same unit to help them.

Anon is not saying women shouldn't be stay at home moms. He's saying more moms should stay in the same home and help raise each generation of kids together.

>>10043394
Literature is one of the last bastions of free expression.
Movies are jewed. TV is jewed. Video games are for manchildren.
But the average poster on this board claims to be intellectual, yet has never had an original thought in his life. Either parroting an opinion his professor told him that he misinterprets as a fact. Or reading a heavily biased subjective book that he also thinks are facts.
You people claim to be intellectual, but silencing dissenting opinions is the most anti-intellectual thing you can possibly do.

>>10043407
>dehumanization of humanity
Only by your weird definition.

>You just accept whatever happens, and you defend it until it stops happening? Are you entirely driven by the status quo?
Where did you get the idea? I am against nuclear families, which are still the status quo.

The only issue single parents have are economical due time/money constrains, which is something pretty easy to solve with enough political will, and won't be a thing once automation kicks in.

>>10043408
Read the second part of the sentence (right after where you have strategically and dishonestly made your cut): an aspirin was a net positive, global capitalism which leads to the atomization of the individual isn't.

I had an interesting conversation with this boy, once. He put me under a great deal of pressure. Basically, society must adapt to a new standard. It's one that nobody understood, or really does, to this day. Old meanings were being thrown out; "liberal" and "conservative" no longer described authority, but rather ...? He had no answer.

We're a bunch of babies with no bathwater. Time to vehemently reject any notion carried by a person who makes clear he or she has no clue what they're even trying to communicate. This I feel is essential to the functioning of any society--you know, not encouraging the stupid people. How does that saying go, again? "Never get into an argument with a retard, because they will just drag you down to your level and beat you with experience."

>>10043403
that's implying society is a closed system of which you are outside

>>10043081
Hey professor, we are all here in the lecture hall waiting for you

>>10043412
Contrary to fedora-belief people telling you to fuck off is not "silencing dissenting opinions".

>>10043413
>which is something pretty easy to solve with enough political will, and won't be a thing once automation kicks in.
You're far too optimistic, and all of your predicaments are dependant on this speculation. If under the fist stages of automation the average man will turn into either a slave or an abandoned individual (in the case UBI projects won't be enough) the loss of nuclear and extended family will be a tragedy. To me this is seems the most reasonable scenario, I genuinely can't understand how you could be optimistic.

>>10043409

Is that what >>10043377 was saying?
Do you translate often for morons? Stable work I imagine.

>>10043412
How are we silencing you exactly? Do you victimised by "us"?

Well, I'm sorry. If it's not too much to ask honey, what was the last novel you read?

>>10043421
No, but it's essentially admitting you don't know how to respond when confronted with an opinion that doesn't agree with your own.
Next time it happens, try thinking of something wittier than "back to /pol/."

>>10043417
It's not though. You can effect the system the inside, especially if you have sophisticated legal and judicial institutions constructed for exactly this purpose.

>>10043425
maybe it's because you actually didn't give any opinions?? oh may the intelligence of some of these conservaturds.

>>10043295
>a typical fascist trait according to Walter Benjamin and Adorno.
adorno was the guy who accused people of fascism because they did not agree with his theories on music, who the fuck cares about his meme opinions

>>10043339
>I'm a futurist fascist who thinks all children should be raised communally by the state
Jesus fuck man, you should read Paracuellos and see how it is to be raised by a fascist state.

>>10043425
Well, how else would you like us to respond to >>10043338? It was the responses to that post which most upset you.

Shall we offer a detailed, in-depth dialectical comparison of /lit/tards and the droolers over at /mu/ next time?

>>10043422
>If under the fist stages of automation the average man will turn into either a slave or an abandoned individual
Why would either be the case? A lot of alienation comes directly from work, eating away out time, and since most people won't have jobs, it'd lead to some serious shit if UBI is too low, since basically everyone will be affected. People in the first world are so idle because life is ridiculously easy and great for most.

>the loss of nuclear and extended family will be a tragedy
How? What would be even a single negative? Instead of being forced into some meme family because you happened to pop from the right vagina surrounded by certain people, you're free to make friends who'll be your actual family. I genuinely don't get the negativity, so I guess we're even here.

identity was a mistake

>>10043425
I've noticed /pol/, and other neckbeards, seem to have this mentality that when someone tries to debate with you the only acceptable course of action is to reciprocate. Any kind of refusal or mockery is taken as an ego-boost by telling themselves the other person doesn't want to talk to them because they aren't smart enough to handle their bulletproof logic.

In reality it is simply the case that other people don't roam around looking for arguments, and so they tell people who do to fuck off. For the plain reason that they don't want to talk to them.

>>10043339

>I'm a futurist fascist who thinks all children should be raised communally by the state.

When autism attempts to speak on human affairs.

>>10043436
But Spain was ultra-traditionalist and not futurist in any way shape or form. They memed the "traditional family" hard.

>>10043441
t. buddhist numale with jewish roots

>>10043436
Thanks for the recommendation, anon. I'll get that.

>>10043443
Resorting to psychoanalyzing an opponent of your ideology is a surefire way to tell you lost a debate. It's a great way to be stuck in bigotry, too.

>>10043439
My point is that people in the future will most likely live in abject misery. Omce their existence won't be justified by economics anymore, the people in your scenario will be scraping for food. We are not going to be a humanity of quirky bohemiens exploring the world.

>>10043460
>implying that's not what /pol/acks have been doing this entire thread.
>ur weak
>ur a joo
>ur brainwashed by ur joo lecturer

>implying that by simply responding to comment that anon has entered into high-stakes "debate" with you

Kek.

>>10043460
This is a very interesting phenomenon. Often they take it to be the case that when someone speaks to them it must be an argument, ignorant of the other persons non-participation in any kind of argument they are confused by the commentary. And once again take it as an ego-boost by telling themselves that the other person just isn't as smart as they are.

It's indicative of the hostile way in which they approach, and perceive, the world. They imagine hostilities are happening where there are none, that exchanges are hostile when they are not, and that anyone who doesn't meet their aggression must implicitly be submitting to it. This is a very dismal view of the world, and I regret that 4chan is anonymous so I can't find out more of the lives of these people and maybe discover why they are like this.

How was school for you, anon?

>>10043461
>We are not going to be a humanity of quirky bohemiens exploring the world.
Well, with out current mindstates it's unlikely the majority will find that very appealing but out mindstates are depended on our environment. The majority in Europe today isn't eager to go into a way too. Look at their attitude from just a bit over a century ago.

>My point is that people in the future will most likely live in abject misery.
Now that's not very likely. The alternative to decent UBI would be muh genocidal drones from the few powerful people, which just isn't very likely because while there are many psychopaths, most aren't. People are generally okay harming others for their own benefit but they also rarely go over the top. Keeping people alive in liveable conditions isn't very heavy on resources. Some shit like in Wall E is much more likely than a dystopia hunting for food.

>>10043295
Civil unions are fine by me.
I don't understand this whole gender/sex divide. There's only one word in my language that describes both at the same time. As in gender and sex are linked to one another. So the problem isn't me being "dishonest" it's more linguistical. I don't think there's a need for 36 new genders, what does it accomplish?
I said I supported their cause, I just find it hard to be vocal about it. As in, I will vote in their favor, I just won't be yelling about it on Twitter. There's a need for an update regarding our transgender laws. Currently you are required to get a vasectomy if you want to legally transfer to the other ender. I live in Finland, you can look it up.
Free healthcare is a priviliege, I don't think all people deserve it. But as I said, I don't know how we would move away from the current system without hurting people. I don't like how the middle class essentially pays most of the costs of free healthcare, since they use privatized sector more (we have both public and private healthcare here).
Fascism is the biggest boogeyman of the 21st century. If you start to regulate speech, you'll get collateral damage and a lot of it.
So according to you I'm some kind of a cryptofascist who doesn't care about human righrs, got it. "Aesthetically pleasing", what the fuck does that even mean? I like feminine penis so much that it makes me support trans rights.
>>10043342
I should've clarified that she thinks that some of the things I say sound like far-right talking points.
My mother has always supported me in my political endevours, she's just worried that I'll get hurt because of the current political climate. She knows that people will intentionally mis-judge my beliefs. Because it has happened to her too. She has admitted that she's bit of a flower child and an idealist, but I can't hold that against her. She's a sweet person.
I think you are projecting.

>>10043473
>And once again take it as an ego-boost by telling themselves that the other person just isn't as smart as they are.

I'd call that textbook pseudo-intellectualism. I wish I lived in a world that this could be universally agreed upon as a bad thing, or one where people who do view at as such wouldn't resort to "I'M RUBBER YOU'RE GLUE" to protect their feelings as supposed adults.

>How was school for you, anon?
Overall? I have it to thank 100% for my being as smart as I am. Public schooling, specifically. But our learning conventions as an entire country have been getting thrown into question ever since Common Core, so any smarts I have are purely in an [inferior] American/white/male/"alt-right"[sic] way. (which, like........how, even) At least according to willful, compulsive detractors.

College on the other hand was fucking awful.

>>10043493
>>How was school for you, anon?
>Overall? I have it to thank 100% for my being as smart as I am.
He's set it up, how can I just ignore it?

>>10043493
How did you get on with the other children?

>College on the other hand was fucking awful.
I see. What was college like?

>>10043493
>Overall? I have it to thank 100% for my being as smart as I am. Public schooling, specifically. But our learning conventions as an entire country have been getting thrown into question ever since Common Core, so any smarts I have are purely in an [inferior] American/white/male/"alt-right"[sic] way. (which, like........how, even) At least according to willful, compulsive detractors

>>10043034
women might disagree

>>10043474
>The alternative to decent UBI would be muh genocidal drones from the few powerful people, which just isn't very likely because while there are many psychopaths, most aren't.
I haven't implied that. I have implied that most people in the future will live as poor people live today in Bombay's slums, or in Rio De Janeiro's favelas. I have absolutely no reason whatsoever to think that future governments will care about my wellbeing past basic survival, and I'm sure that even this need won't be treated efficiently. People who will live in this world might benefit from nuclear and extended families, for life will be harsh and miserable.

>>10043509
>I have implied that most people in the future will live as poor people live today in Bombay's slums, or in Rio De Janeiro's favelas.
Why? Making them live in better conditions like the poor in West Yurope wouldn't affect resources too much, and prevent any kind of uprising. Poor people in 3rd world countries these days are relatively docile because they have a lot hope for the future, take that away and you have billions with nothing to lose willing to do everything to improve their situation. Dealing with them in a forceful way wouldn't save too many resources, and again, powerful people aren't all psychopaths, who'd go with extreme solutions. Compare to how we treat humans now with 100 and 1000 years ago. Shit is constantly improving and getting more humane.

Now if we take poverty from West Europe minus the stigma of being poor and a lot free time, that's a lot potential to create something positive and spending the time they have with other human beings.

>>10043439
>Instead of being forced into some meme family because you happened to pop from the right vagina surrounded by certain people, you're free to make friends who'll be your actual family.
yes because kids are to rationally choose the best family, right?
oh maybe you can fix that with genetical engineering

>>10043503
I had plenty of friends growing up. I always liked making people laugh. I can still recall very formative experiences I had, in junior high of course. Home life was always a bitch, though.

>>10043110 is right: conservatism is merely an attitude toward change, not a political ideology

>>10043529
What was the problem at home?

>>10043507
suffragism was rejected by most women

>>10043439
>you're free to make friends who'll be your actual family

>>10043536
My mother being a lying, cheating divorcee who threw my dad's money at me to keep me away, and herself being a quasi-intellectual who spent my entire childhood planting lies in my head about him.

>>10043553
How did your father fit into all this? Did you have any siblings?

>>10043545
You don't understand my point. As long as the physical possibility to create a better social order exists, I can freely criticize our obsolete social order.

>>10043555
It is such a huge mess, that my particular circumstance would out me quite easily.

>>10043563
You mentioned earlier that college wasn't nice. What was wrong with college?

>>10043562
I am highly curious and somewhat concerned at what precise means there would be to employ in this "physical possibility." The last time in history I can think of that employed a highly "physical" means to rectify an "obsolete world order," it was when Vladimir Lenin realized he could get away with having people dragged into the street and shot dead for having a different opinion about a book.

>>10043562
What I'm saying is anon isn't entirely wrong. With the inevitable (and it is inevitable) demise of family ties we're heading for a very lonely and atomized existence, friends are no substitute.

>>10043570
My lest effort was a community college to learn coding. Their entire curriculum? Go on a free website, that I'm pretty sure offers no certification.

College is totally fucked in this country.

>>10043562
>As long as I can pretend that society is not going to shit in 50 years top, I can criticize those last few things that keeps us sane
Dude your argument is based on the notion that we will soon enough establish global communism without the need of any revolution.

>>10043578
Why didn't you go to regular college?

>>10043582
What defines "regular college"? I went to a University, right out of high school. During my stint there, prerequisite courses for my major were changing by what seemed like every semester. It was completely pointless.

>>10043234
this hurt to read. your position on almost each and every one of those issues matches the standard for "soft" Republicans. how did you come to the conclusion that you're difficult to categorise? you're a literal cliche

>>10043038
>the ideology that destroyed marriage
(idealism intensifies)

>>10043587
I'm Finnish, we don't have a two party system. So generally I don't find it easy to just throw someone in a democrat/republican box.
What exactly is the point of this post? To make me feel bad about myself? Why can't you actually talk to people, the only thing I've been receiving in this thread is insults and belittling responses.
Like, what is the point of telling someone they are an idiot even though that someone wants to learn and communicate? Do you want them to just shut up and keep their views unchanged, just so you can call them an idiot over an over again, because they have an opinion you don't like?

>>10043596
i don't get the marxist "material conditions" meme, immigrants come to western societies and have very different family arrangements and traditions

yes, there's some equalization with time, but the end result is still very distinct, it's obvious that tradition has some power against material conditions

>>10043026
>being this much of a cuck
I honestly hope that your mother gets anally raped by a reffugee and then you get hit by a truck. Degenerate faggots like you deserve all of this and more.

>>10043026
The young have realized that this is the last push for survival. You old fucks are comfortable sellouts who cheer for globalism and this play rigth into the corporatists' hand. The left has failed and always will. It cannot work because it's conceived by autists with no understanding of human nature and supported by egotistical dimwits who cannot handle their envy. Leftism is based on greed. That's wyh they will always stay inferior to the true right.

>>10043739
>the leftist has failed and it always will
>proceed to pick Nazism, Anarcho-Capitalism/Hard Libertarianism and Southern conservatism as their main ideology

Reminder that conservative values are incompatible with capitlism and you can't support both

That's the big meme

>>10043026
nice bait post, but i never understood how progs on this board could condemn 'ideology'; do they have no self-awareness?

Gnon worshipers, on the other hand...

>>10043174
>all of his arguments have to completely discount morality and ethics for them to be considered acceptable

In my experience, conservatives are the ones that typically decry the "moral degradation of our society", etc.

>>10043783
This, tbqh. Freedom of the individual can't coexist with glorified slavery.

>>10043026
You're just making the board worst. Just report and hide non book threads.

>>10043450
but anon, that's just more identity

>>10043094
Notice how no one responded to this comment

>>10043026
>When will this meme of young people adopting conservatism to be edgy and unique stop?
>when will young people stop being edgy and unique
Never. As long as retarded liberalism is the dominant ideology, youth will be attracted to its antithesis. It's simple social dynamics. The young rebel against the values of their elders. This is always the case, and always will be the case.

>>10043957
t. never leaves 4chan

>>10043935
It's not a bad metric, but the current state of reality for most people has been so warped that they think something like ethnic nationalism is the most evil ideology around when it's really the state of nature; ideology is what distorts that state and makes people believe they can change nature.

>>10043026
Anyone who criticizes liberals isn't necessarily a "conservative": Zizek criticizes liberals quite often.

>>10043713
Based on this post, I can tell that this is your only hope in life. Kill yourself.

>>10043323
>additional genders
>thousands of years old

So gender is invented? There are two sexes, biological, natural; from origin. How can there be gender (feeling (in your mind) you are of another sex) outside of this biology?
There are two sexes so there are only two genders. No intermediate, having the mental state differing from this biology is a disorder. See the DS.

>>10044164
Because gender as a social institution is not necessarily derived from biological sex. What is the case is historically in our culture the gender identity imposed on your would be decided based on what genitals you have. This was not necessarily the case in all cultures, as many had a third gender that was culturally neither male nor female.

>No intermediate, having the mental state differing from this biology is a disorder. See the DS.
As of DSM-5 gender dysphoria is no longer classified as a disorder.

>>10043026
Its honestly not about edginess I think.

Its about being against authoritarianism. Ordinarily that is the right/conservatives, but the far left have gone so crazy in some areas that they are unironically MORE authoritarian when it comes to free speech, ability to criticize ideas/religions, etc.

So people are lashing out about being boxed in.

>>10043026
Ah yes, it's only to be edgy and unique, not out of genuine reasoning regarding the cultural, academic and political domains. I'm a fucking anarchist, that's as memey as it gets, but this is a ridiculous and blind premise.

Starting to think that everyone who isn't a centrist is a retard. As though no-one else can see beyond the narrow (and deceitfully enlightening) view that their ideology and corresponding assumptions grant them.

>>10044179
What a backwards culture we live in where mentally sick people like this have their delusions normalized by Marxists.

>>10044213
>WAAAAAAAAAH! SCIENTISTS ARE ONLY RIGHT WHEN THEY AGREE WITH ME!

So much for the rational right.

>>10043880
>"moral degradation of our society"
Because they're appealing to the rose-tinted view that things were better before, and implying that the move towards equality was what made modern society shit. The current morals and ethics of the west are that everyone is equal and should be treated equally. The left is pushing towards giving minorities a bigger voice, and the right is pushing for whites to get a bigger voice, and they're latching onto any authority they can to do it whether it's valid or not

>>10044213
>it's another "arrogant anon dictates how society should work, to the point where he can pinpoint exactly how individuals should concieve about own identity (because apparently people don't even own their fucking identity now) even if he is a pathetic, talentless basement dweller whose advices should be followed by literally no one" episode

>>10044229
>the move towards equality
There's more inequality than there's ever been. You're stupid and getting manipulated and equality doesn't exist anyway. You sound too dumb to be white though so I'm not very surprised.

the fact that every non-/lit/ related threads get about 16,000% more nazis than /lit/ related thread suggests to me that these nazis are barely literate

>>10044213
Think it this way.
You have a penis. At no point this fact implies that you should wear pants, keep your hair short. Almost aspect of what we percieve as virility and femininity would have made no sense 150 years ago: we are just making it up.
As such me identifying as a man is technically as arbitrary as a person with a penis identifying as a woman. I mean, why him/her wearing a skirt makes less sense than me wearing pants? How could you possibly prove such a statement to a point were you can say that you have the legitimacy to suppress the self-identification of another human being (which I account as a human right violation, especially if based on illegitimate reasons)? To justify such an action incredible evidences are required.

>>10044251
"Nazis" haven't existed in over 70 years and your grammar is terrible. Who do you think you are? You can't even hit the shift key.

>>10044249
I meant compared to 60-70 years ago, since that's what a lot of the right seem to latch onto as the last time the west was great. In terms of racial and gender equality there it's objectively better for non-whites and women than ever before

>>10044249
There's more inequality when you compared to the '60s, but to say that our society is more inequal than 18th century France, for example, is laughable.

>>10044260
Hi Nazi.

>>10043081
Your third sentence (which could also be the fourth and the fifth) is also atrociously written.

>>10044259
People are using you to fuck western civilization up. There's a lot of shit for sale to bring about that result. You just happen to be a little more screwed up than most and were likely abused, so you have gone all in on the stinkiest diarrhea sandwich behind the glass. I know you're not to blame though, you're just the weakest.

>>10044251
Just report and hide

>>10044283
>Western civilization
Coded language for "white people".

>>10044263
>>10044269
Nope. But I understand that that's what you've been told to believe. You are the pawn in a bigger game you have no awareness of.

>>10044289
Well that's who created it and who it belongs to.

>>10044283
>People are using you to fuck western civilization up.
I'm not trans, nor I can see how are trans people destroying Western civilization. Is our culture that weak? If 0.3% of the population do not follow your little protocol the entire society collapses?

>>10043935
I didn't respond because I agree and couldn't think of anything else to contribute. Most wise men generally change their mind several times in life. Nobody is gonna have all the answers in their twenties.

>>10044292
As usual the mediocre subhuman is ready to dismiss thr validity of the existence of billions of people only because people of the past who were infinitely smarter, more creative and more driven than him were white, just like him. Truly pathetic, culture is wasted on dorks like you.

>>10044278
Third and fourth, you mean.

>>10044296
It's a symptom of a much bigger sickness.

>>10044318
Not really, it's just the symptom of us not locking these people in mental asylums and jails, whoch is on every possible front an improvement, but I'm sure you'll be apologetic towards these barbaries only because they sound edgy.

>>10044312
Every luxury you enjoy, technology you use, and institution you rent-seek off of was created by white men. Whatever group you belong to is incapable of that which is why your ungrateful and ugly being is squatting in a white nation right now. You don't deserve any of what you have, you are borrowing it.

>>10044329
I don't know what you're talking about. It's the bigger sickness that keeps us from doing that.

>>10044335
We are sick because we are not behaving as immoral monsters? We are sick because we are not locking people in mental asylums for life only because we find their lifestyle kinda odd? Of all the actual, real, tangible problems of this society you've picked the most stupid, uninfluential one.

>>10044333
>Every luxury you enjoy, technology you use, and institution you rent-seek off of was created by white men.
They were created by capable men. For example you have created nothing, you are merely using the stuff you find here and there, just like almost everybody else.

>You don't deserve any of what you have, you are borrowing it.
And you aren't? You think you are entitled to any of the achievements of the great white men od the past? Do you think you that the existence of Mozart, Rembrandt and Gauss make you better than every single non-white person out there? Because this would be hilarious.

>>10043425
If I'm gonna talk to people with opinions like yours id prefer they were more generally pleasant and thoughtful than you seem to be.

I've only got one life, why would i waste it in rhetoric with contemptuous angry children who are going to insult me for disagreeing with them

>>10044333
>An Asian-American engineer deserves to benefit from his labor less than some mediocre white frogposter who probably didn't even major in something difficult and went to a crappy college

You are dumb

>>10043026
When progressives stop being absolutely dominant in terms of social issues.

>>10044289
Why are leftists always anti-white? More importantly why would any white person in their right mind be a leftist at this point in history?

>>10044409
Well because you've constructed a bizarre victim narrative where everyone that doesn't agree with you is "anti-white".

>>10043026
>mfw people actually adhere dogmatically to their already or soon to be obsolete ideologies, both right and left, and waste their time and energy blindly memeing them

>>10043109
>linking a millionaire hollywood actor with communism
how much retardated can the americans become? Find it out in the next thread!

>>10044409
The white man is inferior to the black man in physical strength, looks and cultural authenticity. White culture is too insecure about its own identity and therefore ends up being awkward and contrived. Black culture however is genuine and shameless.

>>10044409
What about being anti-mediocre people who try to use meaningless narratives to justify genocides, mass displacements and subjugations of other races?

>>10043119
Read Sorel and transcend this madness.

>>10043571
Lenin did nothing wrong. Stop swallowing Red Scare propaganda.

>>10043026
you're not wrong but why care?
if you care about politics go get involved in something real, not some meme war by a bunch of edgy autist virgins.
if you don't, then get a good life and you'll realize that they don't really matter.

When will this meme of young people adopting communism to be edgy and unique stop? It doesn't make you an intellectual, nobody cares about your adolescent rebellion against liberal values inherited from baby boomer teachers. I'm fucking sick of it all.

>>10044495
I considered joining a socialist party but there is no such thing in my country, just liberals pretending to be leftist.
It kinda pisses me off that every single /pol/ack has absolutely no clue about political philosophy. The majority of people are definitely not leftist, and you have to be literally insane to think there is some kind of Marxist conspiracy being propagated in universities. Mainstream economics has been very right-wing for a few decades.

>>10044514
Most people who seem to give a shit about politics are just doing it to fill some void in their boring shitty lives, if you're the exception you should be building yourself up to participate in the politics of your country. I mean, if you're really the exception why even care about pol?

>>10044514
>Mainstream economics has been very right-wing for a few decades
When will you brainlets understand that deregulation and neoliberalism are not per se rightist?

There are very right-wing parties that espouse social protectionism and economic interventionism. You're just another retard that got memed by socialist rhetorics.

Communists disgust me on a deep level

>>10043026
>old crusty conservative people: "what's with youngpeople being liberal faggots?"
>young unwashed hippy people: "what's with young people being conservative fogeys?"
How about we respect that young people are just as able to reason as dumb middle aged retards and aren't just victims of every intellectual trend? Everyone wants to act like being under 25 means you have no independent thoughts.

>>10043174
>human rights
nice meme

>>10043037
Well, your dad and grandfather are brainlets.

>>10044565
Left and Right is an economic distinction. Confusion only arises when you add social policy into the equation, but the difference between left economics and right economics is pretty clear and consistent. I'm sorry if that bothers you, but deregulation, privatization and destroying public services is a clearly right-wing position. Fascists have always been very ambigous about their economics so categorizing them on this is more difficult. However, it's a time honored tradition that people who are socially conservative will accept extremely far-right economics if it furthers their goals. There are very few genuine leftists in the camp of acceptable /pol/ opinions.

>>10044647
To that I would add the goal of the business elites behind the Republican party has long been to churn out a watered down, hate-driven, ignorance laden populism so that they can consistently get their policies voted in and extract wealth from the lower classes without them knowing (or even bearing the critical capacity to know) they've been manipulated.

They tried years ago with the Tea Party but when that fizzled out, Trump's happy coincidence provided a fortuitous delivery mechanism.

>>10043257
This.

>>10044681
No one who is actually right on the economic scale wants to ''extract wealth from the lower classes''.
The Tea Party ran on the idea of a small government and less taxes for all, not your weird idea of it.

>>10044647
>>10044681
The left-right distinction stems from the seating order in the national assembly of the French Revolution where proponents of the ancient regime were seated to the right and the proponents of the French Republic were seated to the left. Thinkers of the ancien regime were opposed to the (left-wing) liberal economics of the revolutionary bourgeoisie. That's where Catholic social thought and what Karl Marx labelled feudal socialism stem from. Right-wing politics is first and foremost centered around the conservative ideal of preserving the social order. The prime example of such thinking is Otto Bismarck's national healthcare and pension system.

Liberal capitalist economics being right-wing is a Cold War meme and stems from the fact that US conservatism is in itself just a form of economic liberalism. Liberalism again being an ideology which is in itself left-wing because it again opposes the conservative status quo and values progress to greater liberty.

It is important to note that thatcherite and or reaganite economics (so called far right economics) are not per se right-wing but instead have become associated with right-wing social concepts to which these models are not necessarily linked. You will find that Southern Democrats, UK Conservatives or German Christian Democrats had up until the 1960s a very "left-wing" understanding of economics.

>>10043081
>juvenal

>>10043026
Why are you contaminating /lit/ with this tripe? If you are serious about this topic then it belongs on an appropriate forum page. /lit/ is for information regarding literature, not your personal political gripe.

>>10043357
There's a point where the traditionalist left and the traditionalist right kind of merge into the same thing.

>>10043026
Believe it or not, being edgy is not the sole motivating force behind everybody's politics

It's strange that you think it is

Leftist have opened the box of identity politics.

There will be no time until they open the pandora's box of racial and psychological politics and studies related to them.

And then the left will understand in horror that they're advocating for the racial policies of Nazi regime and absolutely crush.

Fuck off. /lit/ is a conservative board now. This isn't 2014's Marxist safe space /lit/

>>10045043
This. The left is only concerned about the rights people to identify as one of 96 gender roles and not offending anyone of difference race. None of these things inheretly make life better for anyone.

>>10044504
They are most likely still in their teens. Its something they will grow out of once they grow up.

>>10043234
You sound like a quintessential redditor

>>10044454
"Schreiber's mother, who now lives on an ashram in Virginia, was born into a working class household of communists in Brooklyn, New York"

>>10043357
Isn't that closer to NatSoc?

>>10045262
If anything it's a rejection of bourgeois libertinage.

>>10043026
Cry more.

The hatred of what is liberal, epitomized by those evil spirits Equality and Liberty, is in our modern context the beginning of all wisdom.

Exorcise those demons! Drive them back to Hell where they belong!

>>10045043
Crackers going crazy over white women dating blacks is identity politics too, you know. The entire idea of race was invented for muh identity politics, you just never paid attention because you were a privileged group.

>>10045087
>not attacking people over their gender
This instantly makes life a bit better for them.

>not attacking people based on race
This instantly makes life a lot better for billions.

How is not being a shithead is not a huge benefit for society?

>>10043232
>>10043026
>>10043067
>The only reason you should hold your views is to rebel against x
Is this really how plebians do politics and philisophy?

I'm a conservative because I came to my own conclusions after studying and debating with people. I used to be a leftist.

Want to know why? Because I don't waste my time trying to embrace an aesthetic and engage myself in partisanship for purely self interested needs.

Right just wants to make everything an AnCap wonderland

Left wants everyone to be infantile brains in a jar with no accountability

Outer Heaven when

>>10043026
This isn't your safe space anymore. Most people here who are actually well read are right wing leaning and that is a fact.

>>10045494
Skimming through Mein Kampf, having passages from the virgin manifesto printed out and reposting /pol/ memes, doesn't make you well read, sorry.

>>10045438
>I'm a conservative because I came to my own conclusions after studying and debating with people.

>>10045573
Ive read Dostoyevsky, Dante, Aquinas, Milton, Evola. What have you read?

>>10045612
just reading their names doesn't count, anon. You have to read the books they wrote.

>>10045612
That's a lovely beginning if you're still 16. Specially Freddy and Dante are considered pure basics for high schoolers in their country of origin, always feels weird when people namedrop them. And Evola, come on, it's like you do want to prove OP right about young edgy people.

Start with the Greeks, man. Not even meming.

>>10045650
>>10045654
just look at yourselves

>>10045612
>He can count the authors he's read on one hand and considers himself well-read

>>10045597
>I'm a conservative because I came to my own conclusions after studying and debating with people.
Correct. After being a leftist. I'm assuming you became a liberal after watching a few documentaries on /tv/ and sitting through elementary school

>>10045650
>>10045654
That's a lot of non-answers for "what have you read"

>>10045727
I'm not a liberal, I'm just lm@oing at your life because "I'm X because I came to my own conclusions after studying and debating with people." is what everyone says about their views. Literally everyone fancies themselves a free thinker who came about their views through logic and evidence.

It is foolish to boast about this while not realizing that so is everyone else. No one thinks to themselves "Yup, I believe what I do because I easily buckle to my peers", that may well be true in a lot of cases but no one thinks that about themselves because everybody lies to themselves. Potentially including you, which is the folly in thinking to yourself "I come to my own conclusions because I'm just so rational not like these stupid sheeple". An actually logical person should doubt themselves to a degree and always be aware of the possibility that they are not as much of a freethinker as they might like to believe.

>>10043174
>all of his arguments have to completely discount morality and ethics for them to be considered acceptable
More like
>all of his arguments don't take into account imaginary feel-good memes that basically translate into my personal perceptions and biases Informed by the intellectual musings of the rich and privileged hundreds of years ago.

>>10045751
>An actually logical person should doubt themselves to a degree and always be aware of the possibility that they are not as much of a freethinker as they might like to believe
Except unlike most people I'm extremely bookish and have actually gone through a period exploring different modes of though, from the left, to liberals, to the far right and have gone beyond just watching a few tv documentaries and attending uni classes with my own ambitions?

I'm always skeptical.about my views, as I implied when I said I went from being a leftist to a conservative. I'm not one to engage in ad populum not defend it

>>10045792
I don't know you, for all I know you could be the smartest person on the planet. But in reasonably doubting ones own opinions this should also coming with the good faith that other people have some sincere belief in their logic behind their opinions just as you do. If you have a condescending view of other people it's just going to be harder for them to convince you when you're wrong.

Hence the eyeroll, it just seemed unnecessarily self-congratulatory to say that when you should be operating on the reasonable assumption that this is also how everyone else perceives their views.

>>10045767
And your beliefs weren't also informed by the intellectual musings of the rich and privileged hundreds of years ago, as a conservative?

Or maybe your beliefs were informed by upper middle class edgelords who cried over a war and decided the only logical solution was to create an ideology that encouraged perpetual war?

>>10045730
No one is autistic enough to drop a wall of text of writers they read, not even on /lit/.

>>10045828
>f you have a condescending view of other people it's just going to be harder for them to convince you when you're wrong.
Except I am smart enough to understand that intelligence is not a level playing field. I know when I'm wrong, and have the humility to admit it, that's is a character traits I've developed over time as I've expanded outside of my egocentric tendencies in my youth. Some people do not grow out of those tendencies, and after awhile you have to begin to understand that many people argue out of blind faith, some are too egocentric to consider other options leading to dogmatism and anti-dialogical mannerisms, and some people are just stupid. Just because someone contradicts me does not make them stupid, I'm not saying that, but sometimes either through inexperience led naivete or actual cognitive deficits, some people's opinions are worth less than others. It's easy to recognize these opinions once you've begun to engage with other people in dialectical conversations enough.

>>10044454
>thinking that communists can't have economic power just because they dislike capitalism
how much retardated can the americans become? Find it out in the next thread!

>>10045960
>I've developed over time as I've expanded outside of my egocentric tendencies in my youth
You haven't. I recommend you read the post you've just written tomorrow once you've cleared your head, that should make this much clear.

>>10043026
Give it about 3 years, then another movement will come out that's even more contrarian, and usually on the opposite political spectrum.

>>10043957
>conservatives control every branch of government, right-wing populism spreading and gaining traction
Why do conservatives go out of their way to feel oppressed?

>>10046000
because they are not right-wing enough for me

>>10043026
/lit/ is for the discussion of literature, specifically books (fiction & non-fiction), short stories, poetry, creative writing, etc. If you want to discuss history, religion, or the humanities, go to /his/. If you want to discuss politics, go to /pol/. Philosophical discussion can go on either /lit/ or /his/, but ideally those discussions of philosophy that take place on /lit/ should be based around specific philosophical works to which posters can refer.

>>10045970
Actually I have. I've gone beyond it even. Not all opinions are equal, not because they are wrong but because of ad populum. People having reflexive responses that take no thought to spew are not the same as well thought out and explores opinions.

>278 replies

When will you anti-intellectual identity politicians just read Cicero and fuck off already good lord

Yes I mean all of you

>>10046000
>conservatives control every branch of government
>Liberals actually believe this
We have a slight majority in the house and Senate with a broken party, just because our party isn't as broken as your doesn't mean we have """""control""""" over anything. Most of these """"conservatives"""" are just neo-liberals that are pro Israel and pro war. Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same coin, desu.


Any actual right wing thought is censored at every possible outcome, the only reason have a growing conservative movement is because of the alt right. Trump being against ad infinitum immigration and the flooding of labor markets with cheap and exploitable labor is a liberal talking point from 20 years ago. Hell, Trump used to be an old school New York Democrat

>>10046000
Those are puppets who don't work in white people's interests. Right leaning people are the least likely to play the victim card and just want to be free from the mud people who do because jews have instructed them that whites will transfer resources to them if they behave in such a way.

>>10046158
>Identity politics is stupid
>Secularism and egalitarianism are obviously void of any idpol
Promoting vox Populi and democracy is idpol in itself you dip shit

>>10046177
>Promoting vox Populi and democracy is idpol in itself
I mean I guess, but really most concepts of identity politics can be reduced to the functions of the human brain which rationalize the notion of the Self, which are exacerbated by demagoguery. Aren't the individualistic impulses which are amplified by modern ideas of "identity" best diluted via policy based on collective/popular will (and therefore collective identity, i.e. the state, i.e. a flavor of nationalism) which is then mediated by trained professionals who have greater (inter)national perspective than the general populace? (See Cicero's active citizen, the Ideal Statesman)

A good use of identity politics is the one which mitigates the damage it can cause. I think Cicero was on to something. But then this whole thing just devolves back to the classic arguments about the purpose of politics, the state, etc. and what constitutes just governance; I dunno, maybe the canon of western philosophical texts re: political ethics has value to modern readers after all.

If only there was a place on the internet where people familiar with these ideas could get together and discuss their merits.

>>10046253
>We can just replace biological determinism and innate human impulses of nativism and xenophobia with abstract ideals of citizenship
No, people will always have base level of nativistic that is innate between different linguistic, ethnic, racial, and religious groups that can't be wiped out with an abstract nationalistic concept.

>>10046502
And you assume this because?

>>10043507
>women might disagree
Largely irrelevant. This goes for most men too. Most voices should not be heard, especially women's though...

>>10046516
He has a point, since those impulses are observable and ostensibly universal, even across vast expanses of temporal and spatial separation. However,
>>10046502
Because human beings, or at least educated ("enlightened") ones, can observe and identify these tendencies, isn't it the role of policy to limit the degree to which such base impulses can damage a society? As we all know, a population which is bitter and divided is not productive in the humanistic sense. Therefore, the argument that educated policymakers should moderate the passions of the public still stands. And those policymakers themselves can only exist because of those ideals of citizenship and concepts of nationalism, which lends credence to the view that such constructions are useful to the state and ultimately expedite progression towards greater public happiness.

I don't know where I'm going with this

>>10043026
It will stop being edgy and cool when being conservative on a college campus doesn't immediately get you ostracized and harassed even if you aren't particularly obnoxious about it.

>>10046577
Racism isn't "edgy or cool" you dimwitt a nd it will never be tolerated. ever.

who else /unconcerned with the outside world/ here? Thanks, Candide.

>>10046577
There is nothing special about being conservative on a college campus. Obviously people who disagree won't like to hang with you but there are enough other conservatives to balance it out, most people in college are middle class and above, who are generally on the right.

If your interpretation of conservative is to spread /pol/ memes, it's given that even other conservatives won't want to associate with an idiot.

>>10043038
>society is to blame for my problems.
kys pls

>>10043038
is that your problem? you were raised by a single mom? instead of blaming liberalism/marxism/post-modernism/judaism why dont u blame your mom for being a slut and ur dad for being a deadbeat?

>>10046572
Just because it would be ideal to limit the impulses does not mean it's possible to limit the totally, this governance will always conflict within it. What Cicero's point of supporting democracy boils down to is that democracy and ideals of citizenship lessens the expression of these impulses through providing a strong tradition of artificial institutions that can delay impulse gratification among a people even longer. The problem with this is that it does not get rid of these fundamental differences between people it simply decreases the intensity of conflict.The problem is that democracy in itself is flawed system based in abstract ideals that can be exploited and ultimately fail to delay the expression of extreme conflict permenantly, which is what De Tocqueville talks about when democracy Transitions into authoritarianism naturally.

However, the ideals that democracy upholds in itself is still a form of idpol, granted that its a form of idpol meant to prevent conflict. That's the point I'm trying to make.

>>10046609
>There is nothing special about being conservative on a college campus.
There aren't any conservatives ALLOWED on campus, anything to the right of Donald Trump, who is essentially just a democrat from the 90's trying to limit neoliberal immigration policies from flooding the American labor market to drive real wages all across North America while increasing consumption.

Anyone who has the "gall" to say that majority rule is a flawed way to govern people and that scientism as a religion combined with limitless positive liberty leads to nothing but self destruction is called a nazi. Which is doing nothing but making actual conservatives turn so far conservative that they turn into fascists

>>10046653
>The problem is that democracy in itself is flawed system based in abstract ideals that can be exploited and ultimately fail to delay the expression of extreme conflict permanently
This is a solid rebuttal. I admit I hadn't considered democratic institutions as conflict-delaying mechanisms, but rather as conflict-suppression/resolution mechanisms. The former is an insightful analysis. I can see your point now, I think.

>>10043026
>Leftshit appeals to tradition and the status quo

Jesus Christ lads, we're actually winning, aren't we?

>>10043094
>>10043935

Nobody actually attacks specifics though, they just slap a label on a burlap sack and then fill it with the straw of lies and fallacies until it assumes a man-like form, then point to that as the source of all evil in the world.

Too many americans here to have a normal political debate. Sooner or later it comes down to individual opinions on shit like healthcare and free speech and feminism and such... The main difference between america and europe is that in america, only wealthiest prevail in politics. In europe, mostly wealthiest prevail but also some virtuous prevail now and then, regardless of their wealth. We're on another level. Look up to us, the impractical fucks of europe, who don't need materialism to affect every single way of our thought. You don't study communism and religious conservativism. You feel it through europen architecture, art, nature, simple people who make a living with less stress than half of americans on a farm no bigger than your house. And EU is still the largest economy in the world. Leftism, right wingers, communist, fagazzi, fuguzi pfpfpfpfffffiiiiiiuuuu fairy dust.

>>10046761
>simple people who make a living with less stress than half of americans on a farm no bigger than your house
how do i acquire this life

>>10043287
human rights are also a social construct, why does the term 'social construct' have a negative connotation?

>>10044770
underrated post

>>10046712
Well it's just one theory of the cyclical nature of civilization , specifically a democratic one, but good, it's always nice to push dialectic forward.

>>10046616
>>10046621
Isn't it like, fucking obvious that the politics and ideology prevalent in a given society has effects on its people? Because to me it's obvious, and you guys trying to pull back from that, and saying "lol yeah blame society lol you're just a fuckup" just makes me cringe. Goes to show you can't actually comprehend the connections between things you just live in the "normal" world and when you're feeling like a smartass you go into the "philosophy" world and for you they are not even connected because you're a brainlet.
Not him btw

>>10046939
>anon defending conservatism accidentally stumbles upon sociology
top kek

>>10043037
Mfw you also got the brainlet gene

>>10046761
>who don't need materialism to affect every single way of our thought.
You wut? We're just as materialistic as Burgers. Our only saving grace is the actual history, so we generally don't try to meme shit like muh constitution nor have movements like confederate idiots or the whole racial mess since European societies developed in a more organic way. Also lack of mccarthyism, bibles and calvinism.

>>10047092
europe could use some old testament mccarthyism right about now

>>10047092
>constitution nor have movements like confederate idiots or the whole racial mess since European societies developed in a more organic way. Also lack of mccarthyism, bibles and calvinism.
>I'm a European but I don't actually like Europeans so I going to import millions of Africans into Europe under the utopian pretense that radical egalitarianism is true a priori therefore the only difference between us and black people is skin color!
>Our culture will stay the same completely :DDD

Someone should hang you from a lamp post. Luckily in 10-15 years , muslims will do it for me!

Also, you don't know the first thing about the Confederacy beyond small IQ bourgie memes about it , where you see someone who is fat wearing a t-shirt with the flag on it and use ad hominem to discredit anyone who thinks the Confederacy was on the right.

>>10047111
No, thanks. You can keep it all.

>>10047119
>Our culture will stay the same completely :DDD
That's not how culture works, son. It's always moving and evolving, whether some fatass with a flag on his shirt likes it or not.

>>10047132
>Culture is always moving and evolving
>He said living in a democracy, a form of government that existed over a thousand years ago
>I'm a white middle class bourgie who lives in an all white neighborhood where the only black people I have to interact iwht (if at all) are the top 10% of them rich and smart enough to move into my neighborhood
>Importing people from around the world doesn't import their cultural differences as well and lead to ethnic conflict, silly, we all just do drugs and engage in pretty consumerism like me :DDD

The ABSOLUTE STATE of europoors. Can't wait for Sharia law in Britbongistan

>>10047132
I also can't wait for Frenchies to be name Ahmed and for Napolean to be depicted as an African to future generations.

It will be amazing

>>10047141
>>10047146
Easy on the blackpills. The point is to wake people up and expose the jews at the root of the problems.

>>10047141
>a form of government that existed over a thousand years ago
>because democracy now is comparable to democracy in the past
>because a political system is the only facet of culture
Come on, no need to show us the issues with your educational system, we know.

>I'm a white middle class bourgie who lives in an all white neighborhood
>implying

>where the only black people I have to interact iwht (if at all) are the top 10% of them rich and smart enough to move into my neighborhood
There are barely any here but the ones I know are cooks or faggy fashion designers. Basic as fuck.

>Importing people from around the world doesn't import their cultural differences as well
Of course it does. The great thing about culture is that in the end the best one wins, since it won.

>ethnic conflict
Sorry, this ain't Murica.

>we all just do drugs and engage in pretty consumerism like me :DDD
Don't forget promiscuous lifestyle and traveling.

>>10047146
Oh noes, dem scary foreigners and their scary names! Also implying Napoleon didn't get a cultural makeover by the French already.

>>10046000
>us is the only country in the world

>>10047163
>It's just da joos
It's neoliberalism as a whole, and yeah Jews who have lived as a diaspora people for centuries and developed into rootless and cosmopolitan scammers caring for nothing more than profits, they arent the only ones.

Attaching assertions of biological determinism and it's influence on culture gets you with the Jewish Question gets you nowhere, because when most people think of the Jewish Question they think of some elaborate parody where every jew on Earth , even the guys selling you deli meat down the block, are part of some elaborate hive mind.

People these days don't understand modality vs outliers and ethnic conflict, they are indoctrinated at birth into radical individualism

>>10047167
>because democracy now is NOT comparable to democracy in the past
Topkek
>I'm NOT a white middle class bourgie who is never around black people
Then he goes on to say
>There are barely any here but the ones I know are cooks or faggy fashion designers. Basic as fuck.
Where he compared the outliers to the collective. How hilarious. I wonder if regression to the mean is something you even know about as an abstract concept, let alone it's implications on the heritability of behavioral traits on a genetic level.
>The best thing about culture is the best one wins
>It did
And that culture would be?
>Ethnic conflict doesn't exist in Europe
Topkek, how to spot a sheltered child 101
>The only complain to have about foreigner flooding the labor markets and driving down real wages is their names
>This is the strawman that morons will apply to me
Topkek, ethnic conflict is the result.

>>10047178
So what's your strategy if you don't like to bring up the jews because people call you a conspiracy theorist when you do? Just drop blackpills and laugh and exclaim how happy the demise of Europe makes you?

>>10047190
>Topkek
Anon, please, I do believe you and the deficiencies are well know, we're all very sorry that you didn't get the chance to learn much, just surely it's a bit more than THAT?

>compared the outliers to the collective.
Ah, surely you do have data indicating it being the case. You wouldn't just spread baseless shit, would you?

>regression to the mean
Aww, very nice, you did pass 8th grade math. Congratulation.

>heritability of behavioral traits on a genetic level.
Uhh oh, the scary negros!

>And that culture would be?
Whatever we have now. You still fail to get that it's a very fleeting thing. In cause of Yurop very regional too, South Italian culture differs more from North Italian one than everything you have in Murica, for example.

>how to spot a sheltered child 101
>being aware of basic facts makes you sheltered
At least pretend to make sense if you want to earn your (You) instead of pity replies.

>foreigner flooding the labor markets and driving down real wages
Wages are determined by law. Most foreign workers don't get to work, neither do refugees, who don't even have the right to work. If Nigel and Fritz are voting for parties who don't want to protect their wages, it's their issue and fault. Besides, not like the shit will matter with automation coming soon. Stop blaming the scary brown people for your shitty minimum wage job and lack of education to do something better.

>Topkek, ethnic conflict is the result.
Sure, only that the topkeks and the ethnic conflicts exist in your head. Gotta believe harder if you want to introduce the shit to reality.

>>10047217
>A bunch of smug ad hominems
You probably didn't even know what regression to the mean was until I told you.
>Would you give me some statistics that are poor biological determininism
Gladly. Here (pic related) we have crime rates corrected for racial origin and wealth decile which comes from a study in 2016 which proves that ethnic origin correlates higher to increased criminality than wealth levels. On top of that Africans (of the African American variety) are one standard deviation lower in their mean IQ score. We also lnow that monoamine oxidase A (dubbed the warrior gene) varies by race and leads to anti-social personality traits that are (like most anti-social personality traits present in someone past he age of 18) permenant and can never be rehabilitated.
>Southern Italians are different from northern Italians
But blacks are no different Europeans, and importing millions of them won't affect culture and national unity at all? Do you realize how much of a chore uniting Italy under a single nation was? Any idea at all?
>Being aware if facts
You don't have any black people around you and the ones you are around are the top 10% of them who move out to white neighborhoods to work. That is a fact. You don't have any experience with black people, is also a fact, which makes you a sheltered bourgie kid.
>Wages are determined by law
And change depending on what works best for the market you fucking moron. Topkek , wage laws only set a minimum wage , and minimum wages will decrease if they have to. Which is what neo-liberals in the EU want to make Europe more competitive compared to China, which uses quasi slave labor btw.
>Ethnic conflict doesn't exist in Europe
It does now that you've imported Arabs and Africans expecting them to just get along. Pro tip: they genocide each other.

>>10047207
No, just bring up the jq like it was any other ethnic conflict in Europe, citing their diaspora culture and deep hatred of non-jews , especially among Hasids and the Orthodox.

>>10047245
Well, I won't stop from doing that.

>>10043507
>caring about what women think

>>10047240
>/pol/ak posting pic about racial bias in "justice" system
Now, this is good stuff, man.

>which proves that ethnic origin correlates higher to increased criminality than wealth levels.
It proves that blacks got a higher chance to get incarnated. Surely it's something you've been aware off given the interest for the black question?
If not, you shouldn't comment on the topic yet and educate yourself, start with: https://phys.org/news/2016-02-racial-bias-court-sentencing-decisions.html

>one standard deviation lower in their mean IQ score.
Like between whites and jooce?

>monoamine oxidase A
Chinks got a lot of it too. It's like you're implying there are some genetic differences between individuals that are less widespread between individuals who are genetically closer ... mind blown! Also congratz on passing the 5th grade in biology too.

>But blacks are no different Europeans
"Europeans" is a meme. There are huge genetic and cultural differences between fucking regions.

>importing millions of them won't affect culture and national unity at all?
For one, the percentage matters more. 10 millions blacks over a region with 800m people is nothing. Other than that, I noted before that change is given, it's given if you don't accept migrants either. Culture doesn't stagnate.

>Do you realize how much of a chore uniting Italy under a single nation was?
And what a bad idea at that! Oh well, nothing you can't fix with more EU.

>the ones you are around are the top 10%
Citazion needed. Also what's with the whole white hood idea? 50% of the flats here are filled with turks, 10% with russian jews and the rest is pretty mixed. There not too many negros around obviously, but hey, this ain't Murica, so that's expected.

>You don't have any experience with black people
So the ones I know or the ones I met during traveling were like skin chargers? Scary.

>depending on what works best for the market
Not at all. The changes depend on the party promises, a neoliberal party isn't going to increase minimum wage, while some leftist one would. I know the idea to choose a party sounds weird but it actually works if there are different ones too!

>wage laws only set a minimum wage
Which in turn affects other wages.

>minimum wages will decrease if they have to.
Minimum wages will decrease if people vote for it. It's not that complicated of a concept. So if you're bitching about muh smugness and ad hominem, try to keep up with the simple stuff.

>Europe more competitive compared to China
And you really can't think off how to achieve it without lowering the wages? Not at all? Does productivity or creativity give you a hint? How about product quality or trust? You realize that Chinese are importing Euro milk because they don't want to drink their own (or Murican) unregulated shit, right?

>they genocide each other.
So like 1% of the population will fight the other 1%ers? Fucking brown people can't even do genocide right.

>>10047335
>It proves that blacks got a higher chance to get incarnated
>It's a progressive has a conspiracy theory of institutional racism in a society that has corporate and government sponsored purges of racists every month episode
Topkek
>A tenfold increase in incarceration is due to racism AND NOTHING ELSE
I wonder if you even know what a priori means? I wonder if you know what anti-dialogical means? Probably not. No, a tenfold difference in incarceration rates would only be possible if the NSDAP ran the fucking government here all around country, in every country in every state all across the nation. I'm sorry but you're rebuttal is just ridiculously filled with naivete as to how geographic differences in our country works, as well as just basic statistics since you only exist to assert your a priori beliefs and come up with ad hoc rationalizations to keep your ego intact, most of which hinges on insulting me as an American as if being a moron from Europe makes you smarter than someone from America, again, a priori
>Between whites and Jews
Jews actually have the same I as whites, except for mizrahi who are more purely semitic, you see ashkenazi are partially European and inheritted European I averages
>Europeans is a meme there is a huge genetic differences between each other
But no whites on blacks? You seem to be very very very retarded on this point. Lmao
>Chinks
Racist
>Got a lot of it too
Not as much as blacks
>Percentage matters more
>I'm just going to ignore ad infinitum increase in migrants populations displacing white people who have lower birth rates
Topkek.
>Being a smug moron because it's trally all you have left
I can't even... You have to be the worst liberal to date.
>If you just vote for the party that increased wages by taxing people up to 90% by collectivizing wealth we can increase wages and keep our culture intact
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH OH GOD
>the Chinese are importing milk so their productive capacity is stagnant and Al we have to do is have a moral boost by promoting """""creativity""""""
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

>>10047335
>So like 1% of the population will fight the other 1%ers? Fucking brown people can't even do genocide right.
>They're only 1% of the population
London is only 55% white, and the next generation of Paris is going to be 66% white. Who do you think is replacing the white people if not blacks and Arabs?

omg, this is just too much, the egocentrism has become.absurd

>>10047335
>Citation needed
>Doesn't even know about the bell curve
Are fucking- okay kid just how new are you eh? Do you even know what a bell curve is?

>>10047335
>That study
You just quickly googled for racial bias in the court systems really quickly then posted that, and you know it. All that's says is that
>Blacks get harsher sentences for the same crimes (which ignores recidivism rates for prison and priors in general)

Every. Fucking. Study.

>>10047414
>companies firing unproductive workers who happened to be racists and embarrassed their company in public means that that there is no institutional racism
Ah well, anon surely will post a link for this crazy claim later. Shit, he didn't. Alright, perhaps his reasoning will sound convincing...

>prior
>anti-dialogical
You really seem proud of that high school degree and the basic vocabulary of a highschooler that comes with it. Once you reach college you'll learn how to use them in correct context too, it's going to be so exciting!

>a tenfold difference in incarceration rates would only be possible if the NSDAP ran the fucking government here all around country
Citation needed. Besides, Murican racism against blacks did shock the nazis in Germany, so there is that.

>insulting me as an American
If you remember the initial post, it was me noting that the differences between Muricans and Yuropoors aren't as big as the guy I replied to claimed. Now obviously you have tons of systematic failings that we don't have but these are just logical consequences of history, not some inherent issue with Burgers. If you'd read more closely, you'd also note that I am mostly laughing about your beliefs, not you nor America. I don't know you nor claim to do so, which should be obvious given the tone ... I hoped. Though I do find it hard not to assume that you like to play the victim. Hey, on the positive side, you seem to rationalise your beliefs with data, so there is a hope you'll get more and will be able to connect the dots eventually.

>Jews actually have the same I as whites
They don't, ashkenazi top the shit of iq charts, and beyond outdate meme like IQ, they have a ridiculous percentage of scientists and artists that makes everyone else look braindead in comparison. Besides, it's not like "white" even exist. Anglos got noticeable lower IQ compared to Italians for example, at least from the last meme chart I remember.

>But no whites on blacks?
See, it's shit like that that makes it impossible to take your "point" seriously. If you read "VW is different from Porsche", why would your brain jump to the possibility of implication that this could mean "there is no difference between VW and Toyota"

>Racist
Please don't tell my chink fwb, she'll stab me with her calculator or some shit.

>>10047414
>ad infinitum increase in migrants
That's not how it works. With changing economic (and other conditions) so does migration. Lesser war and more economic property in home regions of migrants, means there is lower initiative to take risks. Besides, if we roll with /pol/ scenarios of Yurope becoming a shithole, there will be fewer reasons to go there too. As for muh displacement, for one, who cares. Other than that, obviously birth rates change too, for the scary brown people as well. Wealth correlates with lower birthrates.

>that increased wages by taxing people
Uhh, what? First you was so eager to prove that you finished HS, now you present complete lack of reading comprehension. What's with that shit? Law A: 15 bucks minimum wage = increased wages. Law B: 50% taxes on incomes from 90k = increased taxes (if you sort out the holes). These are different fucking things with different fucking outcomes. I genuinely don't get how you made the jump that one leads to other. It'd be way more effective to roll with one.

>keep our culture intact
Again, you can't. It evolves and changes all the fucking time no matter what you do or don't do. You have a much better chance to keep the weather intact.

>so their productive capacity is stagnant
Who said that? Why would it even matter? We gave up competing on wages with them long ago, it's not something you can win against their system nor how the economy evolves. On the other hand, their system has blind spots, where we can excel. Creativity being one of these, most of innovayshuun still comes from Europe (China isn't even in top 10 of GII). Quality and safety another. It's basic crap, you'd know after one min of research, but just like with scary brown people you prefer to hold some beliefs that have no connection to reality. As the great Führer once said: Sad!

>>10047418
>Who do you think is replacing the white people if not blacks and Arabs?
Tons of rich Russian businessman. Also people from other EU countries. London and Paris are world cities, that aren't representative for the countries. Surely you know that population of UK or France tend to bitch over how much better the people in the capital have it ... almost like scary brown people don't stop the rich to live there.

Besides, how the fuck does it even matter when we talk about the population of an entire country or even EU? There are around 5% Muslims in every Western European countries. That includes the people who lived there for generations and were born there. Fresh migrants are statistically irrelevant.

>>10047421
>a funny picture is relevant for your claim
Come on. Last pity (You). Try a study next time, extra points if it actually supports your claim.

>>10047581
>Ah well, anon surely will post a link for this crazy claim later. Shit, he didn't. Alright, perhaps his reasoning will sound convincing...
>You don't get fired for being racist
Nigger, hate speech is illegal in a lot of countries, and if you want an example just Google the recent google firing scandal lmao
>Calls me stupid for knowing words he doesn't , mean while ignoring the point I was making with those words about how anti-dialogical and dishonest he is
I'm more just disappointed that we can't have a dialectical conversation about our disagreements and you instead have to resort to childish shit flinging
>Citation needed
I already gave you the study you moron, it's Zaw and Darrity 2016 and I posted the graph of their results already.
>>10047240
Learn how to read graphs ffs, not every statistical discrepancy is due to institutional racism. A ten fold increase in incarceration rates implies that blacks commit more crimes than other people. That does not make every black is a criminal, since you have a consistent problem with sperating the collective from outliers, in fact i'd be suprised if you knew what modality even meant.
>If you remember the initial post
You essentially said
>Guys, guys, were are all consumerists here, it's just that us Europeans aren't ebil raycisz n shit
Then you went on to insult the South, which btw, is a part of the US.
>Ashkenazi don't have the same iq as whites
They have a mean I of 102, study that claimed they had a mean I of 120 was made in the 70's and was replaced with one that has more accurate stats according to jews like Richard Lynn.
>Europeans are different from Europeans but Europeans are not different from Africans
Just want to make sure that you are actually, unironically, stating this out if pure cognitive dissonance.
>I'm dating interracially
Ohhhhh so that's why you're being so ego centric, you can't accept criticism or being contradicted because it would hurt you emotionally.

>>10047583
>That's not how it works.
>He says as poor people in Africa and China explode in population
Topkek, they have to go somewhere and white people are decreasing in population everywhere. If you deny this fact your just being a partisan moron.
>Wealth correlates to lower birth rates
No it doesn't. Not even a little bit.
>We can just increase wages whenever we want if we vote for leftists because they only have one issue in mind
I'm legitimately starting to think your iq is below 80
>You can't keep your culture intact
Then why have the Chinese and Japanese kept their intact . Why don't they import millions of people into their borders? Yes you can keep your culture in tact, you don't have to commit suicide just because lol why not?

What's wrong with keeping your cure intact, I thought gentrification and genocide was wrong? Was the colonization of Africa and North America justified then?
>Who said that
You dissonance boy :D

>>10047594
>There are around 5% Muslims in every Western European countries
>He is just openly ignoring every study I have presented on the matter
>Only 5%
They are way over 5% , in France the next generation is only going to be about 2/3 white, and the church is dying their. London is only 55% white and has a Muslim mayor ffs, this is all the while we have a lowering birth rates
>Russian businessmen are the majority of immigrants into Europe
>Doesn't post sauce
Proofs needed, because last time I checked Russians are declining in population due to lower birth rates.

>>10047601
>hate speech is illegal in a lot of countries
Who cares. The point is that if a worker holds racist beliefs, he got issues that make him incompatible with the rest of the team. Even without hate speech laws, it's given to fire them. Just like you'd fire some faggot who comes too late, shit himself constant and/or smells. (Though one probably needs to find some way for the latter, then again, Murican worker protection is notoriously shit) It's bad for the team morale, and depending on his position, the reputation of the company.

>I'm more just disappointed that we can't have a dialectical conversation about our disagreements and you instead have to resort to childish shit flinging
Welcome to 4chains. Besides, it wouldn't work either way due the vastness of the topics at hand and the nature of the board. Also being honest, I couldn't care less, just something to keep me from falling asleep rationing my procrastination for the day. Having a seriously debate would be way too much effort and counterproductive for muh goal.

>I already gave you the study you moron
You didn't provide a study about the conditions negros have to suffer in the injustice system. "Black people get convinced more often" tells us just that. Going from her to they get convinced more often due some issue with black people is a jump you make, without any evidence. "White people evade taxes more often" wouldn't tell us much either for example.

>A ten fold increase in incarceration rates implies that blacks commit more crimes than other people.
Why? We know they also get convinced more often and harsher and we know that "black" neighbourhoods got more cops too, add tons of other pieces of institutional racism and it's not as easy to tell where the issue starts. Claiming otherwise is bullshit and not supported by facts.

>t's just that us Europeans aren't ebil raycisz n shit
Not at all, just our racism is different and less prominent in our society due the way it was created. Most of it was aimed at external targets. This is another example of a gigantic topic that can't be effectively debated on 4chains due the crazy amount of factors involved.

>you went on to insult the South
I singled out a specific group with specific beliefs. You know, like critizising wahhabi Islam without going all "Islam/Muslims are bad".

>according to jews like Richard Lynn
Trusting the jooce. Wowe. I wouldn't go there.

>Just want to make sure that you are actually, unironically, stating this out if pure cognitive dissonance.
Africans are different due skin colour alone. You really have to be reaching to come to the conclusion that I meant something else.

>>10047610
>you can't accept criticism or being contradicted because it would hurt you emotionally.
Well, it's an interesting idea at least, unlike the majority of the posts. Just ... nah. If anything criticism from people holding your viewpoints would be the equivalent of praise, just not a very meaningful one given the source. If you want to hurt me, you gotta give my writing bad reviews or something.

>as poor people in Africa and China explode in population
Just like Chinese economy, and from quite a few African countries too. Specially Chinese migrants are pretty rare either way. The immigration levels before someone helped to create IS by destroying Iraq, bombed Libya and supported the Syrian civil war were much lower. Wonder why!

>white people are decreasing in population everywhere.
Bet there is some country that goes against the trend but again, it's not like I care. The only downside of /pol/s doomsday scenario (which is scientifically problematic either way) would be disappearance of pale white skin. Gotta save Irland from white genocide yo, fuck the other countries.

> No it doesn't. Not even a little bit.
C-can I do some plagiarising, please? "I'm legitimately starting to think your iq is below 80." Wealth correlating with lower birthrates is one of the most basics ever. We're not going to question gravity next, r-right?

>We can just increase wages whenever we want if we vote for leftists because they only have one issue in mind
To a point it's a fact. But as mentioned before, it's not like wages are a relevant issues. Most jobs won't exist soon. So the question at hand is how to ensure people will be able to have decent lives when that happens, not how to prolong wage slavery.

>why have the Chinese and Japanese kept their intact
Their culture now is nothing like it was 50-100-500 years ago. Like, uh, do you even know what culture is? Admittedly, another huge ass topic but come the fuck on.

>Why don't they import millions of people into their borders?
Different economic models and lower demand. Most people don't even want to go there beyond tourism and business, not counting some white guy who thinks Japanese culture is anime of course.

>Was the colonization of Africa and North America justified then?
Alright-o. This has the potential to be amusing. How is "people are coming here, working for us" comparable to "people go to other places, enslave/kill millions and rule over them"?

>>10047614
>They are way over 5%
http://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/religious-projection-table/2010/percent/Europe/
My deepest apologies, it's 5,9% across entire Yurope, including countries that were always Muslim.

>in France the next generation is only going to be about 2/3 white
Because population projections tend to be accurate ... oh right. Besides, not all non whites are Muslims, so what's the issue? As long as they aren't religious, who cares.

>and the church is dying their.
Thank God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

>London is only 55% white
Capitals aren't representative for countries. Especially not world cities, where every rich fuck wants to have a piece from. Have you seen the living costs in London/Paris? Businessman from around the world buy shit there to be protected from prosecution in their countries, and because Yurope is baller as fuck to live in due environmental laws.

>Russian businessmen are the majority of immigrants into Europe
Not Yurope but good places like London and Paris. Also never said majority. Feel free to Google "Russians buying property in London/Paris" I am sure, it'll delight you that they are also joined by rich Chinese, Arabs and Indians. All people who aren't really part of the population due their class.

is this the most useless thread in /lit/ right now?

also quoting every single sentence from your opponent has to be the most annoying way to argue a point ever invented by the internet.

Hopefully never because tradition is preferable to liberalism

I knew /lit/ was full of marxists and betas but I didn't know it was this bad, christ.

Even ignoring arguments about muh individualism or muh sovereignty (or even muh honor or muh purity as secondary rules), I would be far, far right wing purely for the results.
"Left" and "right" things will typically (with a very good interval of confidence) lead to different environments, and right wing politics would considerably increase my utility function.

>>10043026
>rebellion
What did OP mean by this? Does he have trouble imagining people that would simply value different things? Why make a bizarre (and unsubstiantiated) psychobabble "explanation" like this?

>>10048385
>>"Left" and "right" things will typically (with a very good interval of confidence) lead to different environments, and right wing politics would considerably increase my utility function.
>implying right wing people can enjoy things
if you go the utilitarian route you have to concede the game to the left, as most of them are useless utility monsters, so it would make sense to keep conservatives working and give the money to leftists to enjoy it

anyway utilitarianism is wrong

>>10048399
>anyway utilitarianism is wrong
Yes, but it's not like you will go anywhere arguing with principles. The only possible discussion is linking means to end.

>>10047699
>>10047692
So this is troll right? I don't think I've ever heard such nonchalant stupidity that both doesn't confront any kind debate and shrugs off any kind of conflict by repeating a priori ad nauseum.