/lit/ - Literature

>>11118993
I think you missed the point.

Your will is meant to secure the interests of the Ego. However it is YOU who decides what your interests are. Perhaps you need to read Wittgenstein

>>11118993
Welcome to the true path brother, there is still more to come but you're going the right way

>>11119006
However to add on that their is a point in which individual knowledge supersedes the general knowledge of philosophical texts.

At that moment, do not try and derive action from these texts, but rather from the self.

>>11119007
Any other important author?

>>11119006
I love the way Wittgeinsten destroy metaphysics and meta-philosophy, but i hate the research. I think that language is important, but it's not the terms that can helpus to understand the world.

>>11118993
hmm none of those authors strike me as particularly "right libertarian". I can understand the anti-taxation stance and wishing to defend what one has from outside incursion, but the conception of taxation as theft and the emphasis on private property is a dogma in itself - the result of bastard Whiggisms, bourgeois industrial morality... one can use and abuse capitalism without subscribing to the memes of its ideological leeches, the useful idiots of capital. thrive in capitalism, thrive in its downfall. whatever. we are all slaves of our times in a way, we cannot always avoid physical slavery, avoid slavery of the body in whole. but try to prevent yourself becoming a slave in spirit; a credulous, eager and opinionated century-man.

>>11119045
private property and freedom are not dogmas: is the way we live in the world without being under influence of others.

>implying communism wouldn't be the best situation for the individual to flourish

>>11119052
what do libertarians mean by this?

>>11119054
someone decide how to use your fucking money?
In nature if you work the ground you can eat its fruits, if someone decides, must use violence on you.

>>11119056
that p.p. and freedom are natural.

>>11119061
what

>>11119063
>natural
>"freedom"
pure ideology.. I do enjoy my freedom but this is woeful nonsense.

>>11118993
read them again, lad

>>11111111

>>11119072
its natural to eat the fruits of the earth that we work. If someone wants to steal it from you, must use violence and so he will oppress you will of power.

>>11119075
freedom itself doesn't exist, but you can take it.

>>11119085
now you're getting more incoherent

>>11119093
my english is not so good to explainthis type of thing. Freedom is natural, but society can steal from you even before you are born. So it doesn't exist, but in nature it exists and you can take it.

>>11119103
Life grants you freedom, society and others take that freedom by masking it in different forms - religion (higher authority) social responsibility (left leaning politics) etc
Man is naturally free, I suggest OP you read stuff like Walden and Essay's in Idleness to cultivate natural connection with the state of self

>>11119123
>man is naturally free
And there's exactly 0 empirical evidence for this. Man is a social animal, and that is a biological fact. The "free man" as in "free from society, free from culture" has never actually existed, that is a bourgeois spook.

>>11119136
>The "free man" as in "free from society, free from culture" has never actually existed, that is a bourgeois spook.
It is fair to say he never existed, but the concept of the amoral, asocial primitive man in the context of theorising social relations and political rights has existed since antiquity. I would not describe it as a bourgeois spook. Some particular interpretations of what it implicates, perhaps.

>>11119144
To ancient thought, particularly Greek thought, an asocial man (in the most literal sense of the expression: a man outside of society, a man who was not subjected to socialization) is an oxymoron. An asocial man is not a man: it's an animal. This is explicitly stated by Aristotle in his Politics. The concept of the "free man" as a completely socialized man that is abstracted from society (that is, a man who can think, speak a language, etc, and yet is outside of society) is a specifically modern (as in Enlightenment modernity) phenomenon.

>>11119136
>bourgeois spook
Opinion discarded

>>11119157
Man is an animal. Reason bring us the cooperation and society, but in the deep of our abyss we are not different from animals.

>>11119157
Remember that Aristotle had his own philosophical vision at the tail end of the Greek city state and did not represent all Greek thought. Whether he would be judged positively or negatively is beside the point in his role as a sort of proto-political myth. Thrasymachus and Callicles make reference to this sort of man. Hobbes does too. Rousseau is influential in his proposition of the primitive and inherently social man as the basis of politics and human relations - not the asocial egoist who makes legal and contractual pacts for his own interest.

The modern conception of rights of the individual can be traced back to the Enlightenment, yes, and to things like those soldier rebellions with William of Orange or whatever.

>>11119081
>its natural
Nature doesn't exist dumbass.

>>11119054
Nice to see another brother from the /leftypol/ discord on this alt-reich cesspit. You’re are, of course, right, comrade. All those past and present implementations of communism where the state stifled and crushed the individual weren’t real communism! We need to try again. We need to try again.

>>11119224
pathology the post

>>11119191
LE SPOOKS XDDDD

>ITT: people with less than 110 IQ

>>11118993
boi you completely missed all of their points

>>11118993
>read nietzsche, stirner, et al
>read the Masque of Anarchy by Shelley
>realize that oppressive states and religions help a strong egoist by eliminating and capturing needless competitive entities
>anyone truly great will find a way to flourish with disregard towards the welfare of masses (see Stalin)
>understand that this is what the globalist elite are actually setting up

I guess I'm with her now

>>11118993
This is a /leftypol/ LARP. Someone who's gotten that far into "/pol/ stuff" isn't going to be on the left vs right spectrum anymore. Furthermore, capitalism is inherently antithetical to all of those ideas. You must be /leftypol/ because I have no fucking clue how someone could get libertarianism out of those authors. Unless you're one of those types who reads Evola, doesn't understand a word of it, and then pretends that he's the end all be all of philosophy.

>>11118993
>read Evola
>become capitalist
wew lad how did you fuck that one up that bad

>>11118993
>fell for the declinist meme
>took someone else's moral compass and thinks it's his own will to power and has no regard for cultural continuity
>forgot the memo about capitalism still being shit but better than socialism
>fell for the taxation is theft meme
>fell for the lolbertarian private property meme
>literal dogma
>buys a gun because of how insecure about himself
>thinks time is anything other than linear
>fell for the slavery meme
>fell for the misinterpret Nietzsche completely meme
>is actually an edgy nihilist that reinforces line above and not what Nietzsche wanted at all
Read more faggot. Also dump the bullshit with the declinists.