/lit/ - Literature

Before anyone asks, yes

>>13458734
What do you want to know?
>Shutting down a conversation legitimizes it in the eyes of those who can't speak publicly about the issue. Internal contradictions in the egalitarian mythos currently pervading our society has produced in that society several generations of decadent, unambitious, greedy, promiscuous, and desensitized fathers, mothers and sons. Most conservatives are better with their time and money and are psychologically speaking more conscientious than liberals. People overly concerned with societal standards of work ethic and decency are not stupid enough to destroy their reputation by showing allegiance to certain perspectives. Those who are stupid enough usually don't have much to live for anyway, are resentful, and latch onto the ideology to provide them with meaning to their meaningless lives. In 2019, it is career suicide to be honest about your preferences for friends, lovers, neighbors, teachers etc. The current cabal of legacy media, academe, and government constantly shoving diversity, feminism, and open borders down our throat make many nervous, but more nerve wracking is to be ostracized for being realistic about the facts and experiences you know.

>>13458787
>Honest about our lovers
It's clear that people actually prefer miscegenation to ingroup coupling. The lure of the exotic is better than going with the same old.

>>13458734
>tfw I hate women and niggers but I realize capitalism is a disease
This is true isolation, boys.

Anti Capitalism > anti rightwing

>>13458800
>people actually prefer miscegenation.
>citation needed
Who do you mean? People in general?
Not whites.
Pic related.
https://www.prb.org/usintermarriage/
>But most Americans marry someone of the same race. A recent report from the Pew Research Center found that one in seven new marriages in 2008 was either interracial or between a Hispanic and a non-Hispanic—unions encompassed by the term “intermarriages.” This is double the percentage of intermarriages in 1980, but still relatively low. And, as sociologist Dan Lichter points out, the biggest increase appears to be within minority groups.

>>13458800
Guess that explains all the long-lasting mixed race marriages i've seen, i.e. none.

>>13458826
Based.

Spirit; Your soul is not of this world ergo the nourishment of your soul is not found in worldly things. If you truly reflect you'll know deep down that there is a purpose for you being here beyond the fulfilment of animalistic desires. Your physical body will soon perish but your soul will move on and live forever - accept this truth and you can go from there...

>>13458831
That's just racism atm. Indians don't do it because they have strong family and cultural systems. Asians do it almost exclusively. So do Hispanics and blacks.
I suppose it's about the desire to fit into the society which these people want.
We don't have much data on it but if there were no cultural, familial or religious barriers then I'm sure a majority would prefer the more exotic body type

>>13458855
>That's just racism atm.
>Indians don't do it because they have strong family and cultural systems.
What did he mean by this?

>>13458841
I've seen mixed race marriages last longer than same race marriages mainly because these two different race people were actually of the same culture while one of the same race people was from another culture (western female + home country male)

Do lefties actually think the average conservative is any more hateful than them? Because all the evidence shows otherwise

>>13458862
Cultural ties and seeing other races as the enemy or something lower class is what is preventing miscegenation. Without treating each other differently based on race, most people would racemix

>>13458865
Did leftists own slaves? I sure as hell don't think so.

>>13458855
Its not racism. It's practicality. Notice the most loyal gender-race demographic were WW. Who stands to get fucked the most from making a kid with the group statistically highest to pump and dump? Objectively, everyone wants white women and men, but they keep to themselves.

>>13458872
leftists only gained real power post WW2

And the ruling class of the USSR treated their people as slave.
So yes they were the biggest slave drivers

>>13458862
It’s only racism when white people do it.
When non-whites discriminate based on race it’s because they have “strong cultural values”.

>>13458868
people prefer their own race its only a minority of people who race mix.
And the majority of people doing the race mixing are brown girls looking for white men

>>13458787
>we are stupid and consumed by resentment and that's a good thing
what's wrong with rightoids

>>13458782
Mere coincidence.

>>13458872
Also
>who the fuck owns a slave in 2019. Those Trumpist right wingers in Libya????Didn't the Republican party go to war to end slavery?

>>13458904
A small minority of crazies do not delegitimize their argument, and radicals misrepresent all ideologies. Not every Marxist is a tranny (Maybe). There is a difference between the basement dwelling polack and the Chad who browses occasionally.

>>13458782
They don't have duel loyalty, no man serves two masters. They serve the Jewish nation over all else corporal in this world, and by extension of that, of course, they serve Satan.

>>13458898
So are you gonna go with a brown girl? Hehe

>not even talking about books itt
MODS

>>13458855
High IQ has higher assortative mating anon
https://www.nature.com/articles/mp2014105

>>13458950
Okay I'm OP
I'll tell you of an excerpt from the book
>After all, if a ruling class is truly fit to rule, why and how has it allowed a challenge to its power to emerge? What does the emergence of the one say about the fitness of the other?
This says alot about the untouchable rule that right wingers defend. It's hard to defend something as the best when it's getting challenged

>>13458960
Extremism is associated with low IQs

>>13458960
Sure but that doesn't explain why east Asians prefer to outbreed so much in the west. If they have the highest IQ, then it's weird why they'd do this. Makes me very critical about IQ.
Of course I would rather pick a mate that I can relate to and discuss stuff with.

>>13458963
Sure I agree but I don't think it's as much a takedown as you think it is, everything gets challenged. You should flesh out your argument better

>>13458969
That's not a refutation anon and I sort of agree but I think it's secondary as in the variable in between has to do w stability vs instability throughout life and IQ is a good metric for mean stability

>>13458972
Do they? In the west I suppose and I'm inclined to agree but smart asians usually don't interbreed

>>13458800
>>13458855
>that's why people prefer race mixing
>no they don't, here's some data
>that's just because of racism, people still, huh, prefer... errr...
God Liberals are fucking retarded. You claim the right is anti-scientific but you constantly act like this when faced with any proof that invalidates your assumptions, all while acting like smug dick heads. Fuck you.

>>13458734

>>13458872
Do conservatives own slaves?

>>13458826
>Science is bad
Nothing about science, besides it's economic circumstances, is in favor of mammon. Scientists are the new prophets. The only reason we have so many materialistic scientists is our awful education system that turns out researchers that have no respect for or understanding of the scientific tradition.
Also evola is a hot retard, but he is right that commies and liberals are both essentially in the service of intelligent greed.

>>13459040
They own wageslaves

>>13458872
Yes; considering Jews and blacks were the most over represented slave owners in America, and non-Jewish white Christian Anglos were the least, and those slave owning groups are today leftists, it's safe to say that they were.

>>13458868
Absolute nonsense.
The vast majority of humanity innately have a preference for their own.
Without social programming race mixing would be a note in history at best.>>13458872

>>13459087
Would someone really lie on the internet?
Gee I don't think so right?

>>13459092
>The vast majority of humanity innately have a preference for their own.
Completely wrong. The continent of South America is an example.
Blacks in america are another example.
Both of them on average have like 30-40% white genes. It means white men and women bred with them. That's miscegenation on huge scales

>>13458868
Absolute nonsense.
The vast majority of humanity innately have a preference for their own.
Without social programming race mixing would be a historical sidenote at best.

>>13458734
>Blumpf
>conservative
oh no no no no

>>13458872
If you're referring to US history, hell yeah. Everyone owned slaves (bought by mostly Jewish merchants from African warlords, btw).

>>13459104
Nobody socially programmed the Spanish and WASPs to breed so hard with blacks and south americans

>>13459120
What happened to the conservative philosophy that the buyer is always right?
The buyer was white and male and probably to cis too.

>>13458734

CRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEEEEE


now leave, this is not a place you can pretennd youre smarter than you are even if you might think so,so go back to /pol/

>>13459130
I thought /leftypol/ was a spin-off of /lit/.

>>13459123
>doesn't know what liberalism is

>>13458800
>The lure of the exotic
What do you mean exotic? We're all the same though

>>13459100
>30% after 300 some odd years
Where else in history has this separation existed for so long?

>>13459136
Liberalism is social freedom. It's the most free ideology socially but not economically. It's says live and let live.
Nowhere does it say "breed out no matter what"

>>13459123
>unironically uses SA shitholes as an argument for racemixing.

>>13459143
30% is alot. That's 10% every century. And 1% every decade. That's actually the same rate at which Europe is becoming muslim. Wew

>>13459129
Now you're just trolling, right?

>>13458855
>it's racism when whites do it
>strong family structures when the rest do it
Has anyone ever told you that you're a subhuman-tier brainlet?
Because you are.

>>13459010
Its moments like these that just go to confirm that reason and God are on our side,anon.

>>13459092
>The vast majority of humanity innately have a preference for their own.
>Without social programming race mixing would be a note in history at best
Nice induction retard. Just kidding it was dumb.
How do you find the nerve to have opinions grounded in such pathetic evidence and reasonings?
What is this mysterious "social programing" how does it work? Can it's existence be falsified?
The conditions that govern human attraction can not be reduced to an innate bias and social programing.
Even if, if someone is a member of a multiethnic society, multiple ethnicities are included in "their own". Is this "social programing"?
If so, then, if you live in a homogenous society, a preference for your own ethnicity is also determined by social programing, and the role of "social programing" in mate selection is a given and thus cannot be used to argue that "race-mixing" is unnatural.

>>13459146
No need to be snide.

>>13459152
The end user is always right. The conservative theory of value means that a good only has the value that the buyer gives it. Since white males in America gave the slaves value by buying them, they're responsible for slavery. The seller is just a force of the free market. Don't you like free markets? Why can't conservatives stick to their ideology

>>13459153
Where did I say it's racist when whites do it? Stop being obtuse idiot. I'm saying everyone is being kind of racist by treating others like they're another race and that's why they are repelled from each other even though they'd love to secretly breed with other races

>>13458855
Holy shit.

>>13459163
Why so anti-semitic?

Is it true conservatism is about not buying a new pair of pants till your old ones are shredded?

>>13458963
Because the "ruling class" in the West thrives off healthy competition. The threat was allowed to grow because of the virtue of the ruling class to help his fellow men. America and Europe are mostly meritocratic societies, and with all the changes brought on by WW2, men swung the pendulum of racial consciousness from
"This land was founded by and for my people. I hate no man, will provide for myself and my family and serve my country whose founding values of liberty and independence I remember."
To
"Any form of pride in your ancestors or genetics is inherently hateful. One cannot love one's own culture more than any other." In return, those men allowed have begun to outbreed him, and not in the way white people breed. Statistically, until very recently white families were high investment, parents would not create kids they could not afford. Blacks, hispanics and Muslims push out kids like rabbits. The "challenge" to the "ruling class" which are terms I am only using for the sake of argument, is demographic. We provided all the wealth of our nations, but social programs and AffirmAct have redistributed our earned wealth to the underclass, who also happen to poop out way more babies, and who also also take more benefits per capita from all those heads in their household.

>>13459177
Tell me how I'm anti-Semitic

>>13459195
I doubt the ruling class had virtue, I just think those are compromises to avoid losing popularity. For example: you can be as racist as you want and as extreme as you want, but if the public is moving away from that form of thought, you're going to lose power no matter what you do not even wars every two decades can save you.

>>13459163
Sorry, the refusal to acknowledge evidence and strawmanning in this thread got me uncivil. U right tho.

>>13458815
How so? Why is this a contradiction?

>>13459206
https://theweek.com/speedreads/764546/watch-surreal-video-compilation-dozens-local-news-anchors-giving-exact-same-warning-about-fake-news
Do you think it is possible for the ruling class to influence the mob? Like in advertising, to give them a craving for something they never tasted? The ruling class owns all the methods by which people's opinions might change. Media, education and Democratic party all tout the same pseudo-religious narrative. Democracy is a puppet show, the real decisions are made by people whose names we will never know.
"A lion does not concern himself with the opinions of a sheep."
Think of 9-11 and WMDs. They absolutely have control of the Overton window, if it were not for the Internet, which Google and Twitter are already trying to turn into Cable aka Paid Propaganda 2.0

>>13459012
yikes

>>13459249
It's possible all right. But on the other hand do you think the ruling class wants Bernie to win? He's not given coverage by most of the media. And he wants the ruling class and the rich to pay taxes.
It would be counterintuitive for the rich of the ruling class to get into power unless they can control him.

>>13458734
>right wing
>hateful

My politics stem from love — of strong community founded on a bedrock of culture and a sense of identity/belonging. A love of order as the precondition of flourishment and life. Humans are frail and depraved. We need something bigger than ourselves — cultural stories, historical consciousness, good communities and strong institutions.

Leftists claim moral superiority by appeal to an abstract “humanity” to justify their attack on the well being of concrete humans through cultural and institutional erosion (the multicultural agenda) and/or revolution (the communist and cosmopolitan liberal lizard agenda).

Thinking “hate” is limited to any political ideology is utterly moronic and juvenile

>>13459289
And what happened at the DNC last election, Anon? What happened to Bernie? They controlled him alright. He may think he has a shot, but he is only their to pass the torch to the DNC approved candidate.

>>13458872
Yes?
It was always Christcucks who killed slavery around the world.
>can't own a fellow christian as a slave
Way back.
>can't own a white as a slave
Anglo empire with the backing of all the Europeans tired of the Crimean Tatars, Barbary Pirates, Arabs and Radhanite jews selling Europeans into slavery.
Mainly aimed at the Ottomans.
>can't own a slave in America
Second Great Awakening with Evangelicals and Quakers.
>can't own a slave period
Anglo empire at first, Europe and later Murrica enforcing it against any would-be traders and aid-receivers like Mauritania.

Same with eugenics btw. Catholics were butthurt about it for years before Hitler was even a thing. Chesterton went on a spiel about how it was one of the greatest evils in the late 1910s iirc.

>>13459100
>The continent of South America is an example.
Do you know anything about it?
The usual composition is Whites go with whites if they can. Goes double if they're actually higher class people because here the upper class are unapologetic about their racial preferences "My kid wouldn't embarrass himself by bringing home someone like that!".
Mixed go with whites or lighter-skinned mixed. "Whitening the race" as Bolsonaro's mixed right-hand man put it.
Blacks go with blacks. Particularly if they're favela niggers.
For long-term relationships it's even more strict.

>>13459359
Sure. I guess they can play "whiter than you".
I'd still argue that goes back to the invasion by spain and portugal. Since then being whiter has been associated with being upper class.

>>13459100
But there's little miscegenation into the white population.

>>13459359
Most of them are still mixed race. I guess they're moving towards trying to separate races based on whiteness and trying to breed "upwards". That's still racemixing anyhow

>>13459129

Is it possible to seat all right wingers at the same table?
Roosevelt, next to Hitler, Trump and Ayn Rand across the table from them along with W.Bush next to Reagan?

>>13459390
Not really. Just because of the one drop rule. You call a child black even if his mother or father was white.

>thread title
If you define your cause by "anti-anything", you're a movement devoid of principle and thus integrity.

Dread it. Run from it. Destiny still arrives

>>13459417
Anti-abortion?

>>13459416
Yes mutts identify as black but my point stands that the white population is still largely pure white. There's I believe under a 2% average non white DNA among American whites, and that would include a lot of white looking quarter blacks or whatever.

>ITT anti-right wingers see the power of the dark side of the force and hide from facts.

>>13459430
More than 90% of whites in America pass the one drop test. Mutt meme is a meme.

>>13459388
Plenty of mixedfags going on about their non-existent native ancestry. (chances are they're more Cuban than Inca)
>>13459393
It's simple eugenics. Few of the ones who are part of the right 'caste' want to mix and even fewer go for more than one-night stands.

>>13459428
Ummmm sweetie, it's called pro-life.

>>13459422
What are white Hispanics? Are they Spanish?

>>13459443
Fair enough. Point conceded.

>>13459440
>Plenty of mixedfags going on about their non-existent native ancestry. (chances are they're more Cuban than Inca)
To win social cred I mean.
I don't think it has much to do with Spaniards or colonization so much as the whites do better, are smarter, most often look better and are richer or some combination thereof.

>>13459437
>>13459430
That's simply because you're not white unless you can pass the one drop test. That's what white means in America.

>>13458855
You are a disgusting human being

>>13459448
Yeah being 99% white in Brazil and inheriting a fortune from your colonialist ancestors means nothing.
You inherited that fortune because you are smarter, stronger, better and have bigger dicks, oh wait...

>>13458734
The left wing is far far more hateful than the right, the right is 90% absolute pushover libs who don't even have the balls to say that maybe tranny kid storytime isn't the best thing possible. Meanwhile a big subsection of the left talks about shooting landlords and guillotining the rich.

>>13459465
Or in South Africa they actually act on those suggestions.

>>13459457
I'm not white by our standards and most of the richfags aren't people who made their fortune off colonization. Many of them aren't even from that time but germanfags who came later during industrialization.

>>13459470
Marxism 101:
Live in a meritocratic society
Group 1 Has
Group 2 Has not
Group 1 stole their riches from Group 2 and it is sacrilige to disagree.

>>13459450
So what? That doesn't at all discount what we've been saying. So the white identity group in America is almost pure white-European genetically while other groups are more mixed. Whites in America are pure white. Fact.

>>13459470
Most of the low level richfags aren't the colonialists of course. The richest who have more than money than the low level richfags combined usually got alot of old money.

>>13458734
Any more questions OP? This is not an attack, but wouldn't you want it straight from the horses mouth? The loudest are considered the largest of any advocacy group, but some of us have intellectual reasons for where we stand. I submit my ideology to your criticism.

>>13459495
Views on women? Economics? Race?

>>13459487
>>13459457
You're starting to sound awfully Antisemitic.

>>13459486
>almost

>>13459495
How do you believe inheritance factors into merit?
How can it be skill to inherit that perhaps could let you succeed even though you weren't meant to?

The far right analysis of Jewish Power has so much explanatory power that you cannot just call it "conspiracy theory". Say what you want, but this Epstein episode completely proves the idea of zog, a Mossad blackmail operation aimed at the highest levels of American Power. Hillary fucking Clinton is involved in this, the person you almost voted in. The far right has been talking about this for decades

>>13459521
Except trump was friends with him and trump is far right. So pot calling the kettle black?

>>13459506
Not him but I'll give you a rundown.
>women
Evolved for child bearing and rearing, are horribly mis-allocated in our society. Shouldn't be in higher education or politics, not even in cases of the exceptionally intelligent or hard working. That said I'm not anti-woman, just anti-feminist. I love women. Many men have become bitter to the nature of women these days, but I still love women and think their faults are largely exasperated and allowed merely within our cultural context. In a better context women wouldn't be as terrible as they are today.
>economics
Free market economics are universally superior strictly for matters of making money, but do have certain problems. I would like to see purely free trade within nations with trade barriers exclusively for international trade and preferably for trade between different races/cultures of people.
>race
They obviously exist and our establishment expends substantial ressources to ensure that it's not openly discussed to the point where they will ruin good scientists to keep it covered up. Now why would they do this? To push globalism for the financial gain of certain elites of course.

>>13459465
Not that I disagree with the point but conservatives aren't even human let alone right wing.

>>13459506
Not quoted and i'd label myself a Nationalist before i'd add the Conservative in the mix. Ex-Social Democrat too.
>views on women
They're lovely.
Fundamentally different beings from men though and claiming otherwise is at best ignorant.
>Economics?
Important if you don't want to starve and mixed economies seem to manage that fine. Increasingly the taxes that were supposed to be temporary and used for our collective benefit are being funneled into outsiders, and organizations dealing with, with no business receiving anything at all from it.
Hence i'm predisposed to lower taxes in general but particularly on income, VAT and gas.
>Race?
Important insofar as it's my people's country and anyone not from our ethnic group has no business ruling it, taxing it or indeed making any claims on it whatsoever.
Other than defining our collective and whom are owed and expected what I couldn't give a toss about racial classification. Yeah, the average african might be dumber than the average european and the average european might be dumber than the average chinese but those averages aren't what's important to me.

>>13459532
Trump is a right wing populist, in no sane works would he be far right. He's also proven to be completely owned by Zionists

>>13459532
Trump's not far right. He's only far right in the context of the current hyper-left media-education establishment. In actuality he's a center-right Boomer. You'll see far right in our lifetimes. Just wait.
Just wait, you'll see far right in our life times.

>>13459532
Trump isn't far right you mongoloid he was democrat for years and only ran conservative because he knows how to play the popularity game. He's one of the biggest rhinos there have ever been.

>>13459532
> trump is far right.
Don't troll.

>>13459532
Trump supposedly fed info on Epstein to the feds and had him banned from his clubs when he tried recruiting girls at his clubs.
I doubt that venue is going to very far. He still humps zionism like no tomorrow tho.

>>13459422
What pleasure do you get out of that, honest question?

>>13458734
hate doesn't come solely from one side of the spectrum

>>13459506
> Women
I'm not fundamentally opposed to the extremely talented section of the female sex from rising in society even to leadership positions, rare though it may be. It is however unhealthy to society as a whole for this to be viewed as some kind of norm which women are pushed and shamed towards as they are now.

> Economics
As said by some of the world leaders in recent memory which I have the upmost respect for (Khomeini and Ahmadinejad),
"Economics is for donkeys". Not that it isn't important but this modern nasty business of forging society to fit economic theory.
This is backwards, economic theory should only be important so far as it acts in the interest of the society, I guess i'm more of a Hitler than a Strasser if that works for you. Socially conservative and fiscally anti-capitalist, as capitalism is an inherently globalising force which strips away identity and turns people into morality free economic units. Communism is obviously gay but I have far more respect for a Nazbol than a NatCap.

> Race
Niggers be gay, I believe that the traditional view of a nation state (or several friendly brother nations/city states). Each peoples should be able to better themselves and this multi racial shit creates a state that is too discordant to work. Things will go fine so long as things are good, but when stuff goes down hill it will fucking collapse, and that isn't sustainable.
I agree with racial science to the extent that it exists but in my eyes it isn't any core part of my philosophy (egalitarianism could be correct and I wouldn't really change my views). Culture of Critique and the other books of that trilogy are great and I wont reiterate them here, furthermore Israel must be destroyed.

>>13459515
Make no mistake, inheritance plays a huge factor. When I was younger, my family was very wealthy. But divorce and substance abuse ripped us apart emotionally and financially. I look at my cousins from affluent parents who stayed together and they are further ahead in terms of education and money-making, but thoroughly naive about the goings on outside their gated communities. I spent much of my youth being angry at my parents for neglecting me, but after a certain point, a utilitarian view of the world steps in to preserve you:
I am here, and I must earn my keep if I am to survive. Yes, others had much more than me, but I have been given gifts that I don't fully know how to use yet. Even tragedy is a gift, for once the Universe has scraped you down to rock-bottom against your will, then no amount of voluntary growing pain can scare me. I am grateful for having not. I look in the eyes of my cousins and I only see placcid comfort. I look at the friends who struggle like I do and I see ambitious fire in their eyes. They want to do good. Its not about what you walk away from, its about what you walk away with.
Our country is cruel and competitive yes, but even though our government pours billions into the black community, puts them in nicer areas through housing programs, provides limitless welfare to single moms who knew the government would cover the cost of the child, shuts out higher scoring white and Asian students from Universities and jobs to meet a certain quota, in spite of all that see the results. MLK said judge by character not skin color. Africa has diamonds, gold, oil, domesticable animals, mountians of metals and heaps of stone, and yet, before colonization, none of these things were put to use. In America, statistically, blacks are better off than anywhere in Africa or the world with the exception of Europe. In spite of all the above push to make black men more like white men, they have not. The poorest white town has a lower crime rate than the richest black one. Blacks routinely drop out of Ivy League schools who diversity-hired them because they are struggling to keep up with their peers. Inheritance can put you ahead, but money is not what makes you successful from birth after you have enough not to be malnourished. It is character, intelligence and resourcefulness that win the day or
>whatever paltry inheritance the universe gave you, you must make do with it. To steal the riches of the highly affluent is to spit in the face of your dream of one day handing money down to your own children, so they won't struggle the way you did.
I do not advocate corporatism or crooked capitalism. I do not advocate authoritarianism. I advocate for my society to determine itself without babysitting people who would starve without us and show continuous ingratitude to the first society to end slavery, to raise them to the same legal status.

>>13459515
>TL;DR Everyone inherits good and bad from their parents. Wealth, susceptibility to addictions, intelligence or lack there of, height. But the ship must make it to port, and we can't be a free loader. Compare your paltry inheritance to that of your ancestors who had less and somehow made more with it.
I know I rambled a ton there, but if theres any clarification needed I'm happy to comply.

>>13459549
Have sex

>>13458734
Can you please stop trying to politicize my board? There are three explicitly political threads. Keep pol in pol please

>>13459549
I agree with most everything there except I'm trying to figure out what we should do with women. They will not give back the vote willingly. They will not consider the long term effects of low birth rates and miscegenation because they see the world through intuitive, species-driven, collective eyes. So we must find somewhere for them. What if they worked, schooled and lived seperated from men, and shunned sluttishness. Take the vote, but don't go all Sharia and keep them inside the house. We're better than that. Would we be more economically competitive with a stay at home mom raising well developed children compared to a two-income household?

>>13459679
/thread

>>13459679
No we can't go there all the shills are there right now.

>>13459693
You fucks are ruining one of the last few truely comfy boards. Please fuck off

>>13459701
What did you expect to see in an Anti-RW general?

>>13459684
> not give back the vote willingly
Not as they are now obviously (nor would men today take it) but Hitler and Mussolini didn't have this problem for different reasons. Really women will follow strong men, if we can sort our collective shit out they will be fine, but without fixing men talking about fixing women is pointless.
Women back in the day not only had children but engaged in wholesome, creative and useful trades such as weaving and sowing. Those are obviously less useful today but it should show that women working isn't the problem in itself.

> economically competitive
You have fallen for the economics meme. Obviously having more workers is more productive, but unless the men are all out fighting a war or something who gives a fuck, there are many more important things than GDP.

>>13459664
I will, after I get married.

>>13459684
Raise your daughter well. I wouldn't be so sure they won't give back the vote. Some would be willing to give it back already, I've met many, and I suspect that number will grow rapidly in the future. That's out of our control though, all we can do is to raise our daughters well. Don't vacciante. Don't abuse. Keep them out of public school. Keep them out of higher education. Keep TV out of your house. Give them the appropriate attention and affection they need (much easier with a SAHM). Get them married young (16-20). It's not all too complicated really. If more people did this our current corrupt system would collapse in a generation.

>>13459701
The left started politicizing fucking everything decades ago. If I can't even play video games in peace without SJWs doing their retarded evangelization then no I won't be quiet here for your sake. Lick my sweaty chode.

>>13459720
I expect people to respect the sanctity of the board enough not to make these dumb threads. Threads like these have never convinced a single soul of anything whatsoever and only serve to bolster unnecessary hostility and hatred among posters. If this had anything to do with literature it'd be slightly more tolerable but people in this thread are just debating politics as if this was pol

>>13459770
> Debating politics
> Outer /pol/
Now surely you jest, it is always the case that boards are only good at discussing things they aren't focused on.

>>13459770
I don't want pol to get into lit either. The discussions here are far too intelligent. However, look at the productive conversation OP and I are having. Its not
REEEEEEE
If he was going to make this thread and call me and mine hateful, then I was going to defend myself. And we're discussing things swimmingly. Im sorry its the most popular thread RN, make your own. At least the discussion here (other than a few yards, sorry about that but that's in every thread) is productive and civil.

>>13459738
Fucking based.

>tfw leftist brainlets are losing their hegemony over faux-intellectualism
what a shame

>>13459795
>The discussions here are far too intelligent
/lit/ is mostly pseudo-intellectuals

>>13459810
Word salads galore yes. But Ill take a tasty word salad about a subject over the incoherent garglings of the deep on other boards. Sci is more rigorous, but so dry and uncreative that you're practically taking your coursework to 4chan.

>>13459825
>But Ill take a tasty word salad about a subject over the incoherent garglings of the deep on other boards
it's still the same shit in the end though, they just put fancy greens and salad dressing over the dog shit

The presence of the bottom right is utterly ignored by these midwit New York times bestseller pseuds. They don't want to admit how authoritarian there are.

>>13459846
It is by far the least populated area, and people generally just don't want to associate with anyone that falls within. How does it feel to be the ultimate gaylord?

>>13459846
based

>>13459851
It's the most populated area. Small government conservatives are all bottom right.
>bake the cake biggot or you'll be jailed
Authoritarian.
>a baker can bake for whom he pleases
Liberal.

>>13459144
>liberalism
>It's the most free ideology socially
getting ostracised like lepers in the medieval times for different political opinions doesn't sound like freedom to me. people get sued for their religious views (bake the cake bigot) or get fired from jobs for not being tolerant of islamic terrorism. The UK and France are probably the most liberal countries in the world right now and at the same time have the strongest social control over their people.
Liberalism instead of controlling the people through authoritarian state controls it controls the people through social shaming reinforced by authoritarian state controls.

>>13459170
There are different races and it's not because of a cultural thing. Different cultures are a consequence of biological different races.

>>13458800
That's the cope of the most mixed race on the planet, Schlomo

>>13460005
>North Korea and South Korea are different because they are biologically different races

>>13458815

>Capitalism is a disease.

How the fuck do you reach this level of inbred?

>>13459144
Technically liberalism is that but the modern left is not liberal by that definition. The modern left is anything but "live and let live", even parties that call themselves liberals, like the LPC, are not liberal by that standard at all.

>>13458969
>people more confident in their opinions are less likely to change their opinions
wow, what an unexpected finding, would never think of it if not for that experiment

Imagine thinking right-wing = capitalism/conservatism/reaction.


Since time is in fact circular, it is not in the past that the present ought to be measured in order to prepare for the future, it is by the extreme future (the concept of what is ideally to be realized) which is also the origin of the past, which thereby assumes the past only by revising it.
When the present is decaying (and such is the sad condition of our times), it is natural that we tend, in a reactionary fashion, to return to the past, because illness is a corruption of the health it presupposes ; reaction is opposed to progressivism, which dreams of an infinite, linear movement towards a necessary progress (as opposed to the past situation). But the reactionary spirit opposes progressivism only by adopting the same postulate, namely the linear conception of time ("things were better before"), and as such, is the partner-in-crime of progressivism. To return to the past to ward off the catastrophe of a future, potentially contained in a decaying present would re-engage the process of giving birth to this present decadency. The proper method of promoting real progress, then, is not to return to the past as a paradigm - thus to a past that needs to be made present again - but to return to the past in a critical perspective, namely to make present only what was timeless within the past, and to what the past itself was inadequate (if it had been adequate with it, it would never have given birth to a decaying present), in order to promote a future which, far from progressivism, is inscribed in the "telos" of a return to the Origin (the concept of what has to be, first in intention and ultimate in execution), which, far from the reactionary spirit (sacralization of the past as past), is ablative of temporality itself and of the past. It is not because this shifting, collective, historical reality, which is France, has become aware of its vocation only within and through its history, that its past history should be taken as the proper expression of its concept.

>>13458969
That's not determinant of cognitive ability, it's determinant of self assuredness, aka centrists are betas.

Donald Trump is a Democrat.

>>13458734
>Conservatism from Edmund Burke to Donald Trump
Since when is Trump a conservative? Nothing conservative about the guy.

>>13459163
>white males invented slavery by buying slaves
>centuries of middle eastern and African slaving b4

Going by your argument, whites just figured out how to increase the value of slaves. They aren’t the genesis

>>13460440
It's just a neurotic jew calling anyone who opposes radical subversion Conservative.

>>13458734
I've actually read this. This book is the libera-boomer counterpart to Shapiro/Kirk droning on about "the left" being the real baddies.

If you want a good critique of right-wing ideology look elsewhere.

>>13459271
>yikes

>>13459749
What kind of advice is this? If America followed this advice, they'd become Somalia is a decade

>>13459973
Social shaming is part and parcel of freedom. It's not authoritarian. People are free to reject you, if you don't accept everyone's freedoms and rights.

>>13460781
What's your criticism of the book?

>>13458782
Well, there you go.

>>13460343
And a stiff right-armed "aloha" to you too, brother.

>>13460909
It's totalitarian. It's basically insane religious fervor, and it doesn't occur naturally, it is produced by the press and academia and the government is complicit, especially the civil service, the FBI's reliance on institutions like the SPLC.

It is not a matter of free interaction between individuals making up their mind, like your dishonest portrayal would suggest, it is a massive force in society that occupies positions of power and molds people's minds to its dogma.

>>13460909
Are you suggesting that people are only free to socially shame a person if they don't "accept everyone's freedoms and rights"? What are you, some kind of gay neoliberal libertarian?
If that isn't the case I could convinced society magically to brutally socially shame miscegenation, blacks or homosexuals that wouldn't in some way decrease liberal freedom.
No, what you want is to control people in the exact same way I do but you want that control to be the fucking dumb shit hive mind to crush any dissent, why would it matter who is doing the crushing if the result is the same?

>>13458782
>muh joos

>>13460974
Better than killing your opposition.

>>13460975
Except when you do it, you cause voter suppression and start killing unarmed blacks and homosexuals with their hands in the air. Then your cops get away with it on paid leave.

When we do it, you don't lose any rights or your life, just your job. You keep your life and you keep your right to vote. We just don't like people like you employed at our companies because you might shoot up the place.

>>13461234
You are not good people, you revel in your power and in hurting those who contradict you, while narcissistically loving your own holiness. Your refusal to look at reality harms both the groups you hate and the ones you profess to support.

>>13461243
Nothing more free than liberalism and libertarianism. This is the American spirit.

>>13458969
That explains Arabs, but are you saying all blacks and most Hispanics are also extremists?

>>13458782
>le "I am Jewish but never practice" kike

>>13458855
It's not hateful to want to reproduce with someone somewhat genetically similar to you who you have more in common with.

>>13458864
Anecdotal evidence is cool and all but actual data shows that mixed race marriages are much more likely to dissolve overall, with a mixed race couple being the #2 predictor of divorce behind one of the spouses having an anxiety disorder.

>>13458960
>https://www.nature.com/articles/mp2014105
Interesting, thanks for link

>>13461234
>When we do it, you don't lose any rights or your life
I almost admire that you buy this hard into liberalism’s white legend. A faith so pure is hard to find these days.

>>13459058
>all bourgeois are conservative/right wing
likely the opposite is closer to the truth. see: google, apple, facebook, the rockefellers, the carnegie foundation etc. You are a dumbass.

for me, it's 属国民主主義論. It's a book about the japanese grass root far right movement, targetting boomers and zoomers, successfully became a mainstream. It's quite different from europ or america.

>>13459041
Consider adopting a tripcode so people can filter you

>>13461957
what about The Wilks brothers and The Koch brothers? I don't think your aforementioned jews are active as they are.

>>13461982
I don't give a shit about Jews and I did not mention them afore. Jews are late coming nouveau bourgeois parasites anyway. American WASPs are closer to the primary affliction. Anyhow the Kochs are neoliberal agents of decay the same as Zuckerberg, Google and all the rest. They may nitpick with eachother about the fine points of how to machinate their particular variant of progress but there is much, much more tacit agreement than conflict there. You seem to be the sort of person who thinks there is a meaningful difference between republicans and democrats.

>>13459558
Hace sex

>>13458868
found the incel

>>13459444
People from Hispanic countries whose European ancestors didn't mix with the natives/blacks.

>>13461982
The Koch brothers are retardo libertarians just look at the policies they actually support. That they fund 'conservatives' to hold the positions they do now is more than enough evidence of that.
The Wilks fund the Daily Wire, I guess they are conservatives, but of the worst and most malicious type. Even if you lump both conservatives, neither set of brothers are right wing in any fucking way, try again, capital will almost always (baring individual exceptions of course) tend to for the grand coalition with the leftist and the anarchist against any uncontrolled nationalist force.
>>13462025
The meaningful difference is that in the end the conservative is far more perfidious an enemy, far more hurtful and far less trustworthy then any leftist could be. Traitor before enemy.

>>13461234
> you cause voter suppression and start killing unarmed blacks and homosexuals with their hands in the air. Then your cops get away with it on paid leave.
What the actual fuck are you talking about? Do you think that because I am a nationalist I inherently support the pigs? I don't, obviously, why in hell would I? The police actually go after people who think like I do. MY COPS, fuck right the hell off.

You lose your job, social media accounts, bank account, visa, university spot, most social connections and occasionally you get thrown in prison for a while. Yes, yes, there is no need to dick wave how the institutions of power rally to support you, i'm well aware unfortunately.
What happens when I socially shame you on the other hand, when i'm some evil Nazi? Would you lose your bank account? Would you lose your Job? Would you lose your family? Really if worst comes to worst you would be bullied on the internet until the people doing it were banned at your whim.
Thinking I would shoot up a place is some kind of cannard and i'm not very happy with you.

Once again, you want the same power I do, you want to be the one wearing the boot, stomping those who you see as doing unacceptable things, there is nothing to be ashamed of in that.

I'll ask a second time, are people free to socially reject blacks and fags?
Or will you reveal yourself as the authoritarian we all know you to be and tell me that you want to be able to dictate what the community is allowed to accept and shun dispute what they may wish.

>>13461170
>muh cowinkydink

>>13460897
The Venn diagram overlap between /pol/ and Islam has long been obvious. Both ideologies serve the same purpose, in that they give lazy young men both a purpose and an opportunity to control women

>>13462765
Technically that's called civilization.

>>13458937
Satan is a Jewish concept. The word is Hebrew in origin. By using it, you perpetuate a Jewish meme.

How is it "the book that predicted Trump" 2nd edition never mentioned Trump in the 1st edition?

The only mention of Donald was Rumsfeld.

>>13462773
based

>>13462773
The concept of Satan predates Judaism by many thousands of years, anon. The Jewish tradition derived from Zoroastrianism but the concept was even older. The word Satan may be Hebrew but the idea behind it is present in perhaps every religion, and is something that is intuitive to mankind.

>>13459144
The social liberalism/economic liberalism is a shit dichotomy used by coping leftists to pretend they aren't in fact true liberals. These are two sides of the same coin.

>>13462765
You do realise that >we want to control men even more than women, right?

>>13462768

>>13458734
>why people become right wing and so beautiful?
With a quick glance my eyes gave me this

>>13463158
Hmm

>>13458841
I've been with my boyfriend for 7 years. We've lived together for about 6. Never broken up or cheated on each other. I'm mixed, he's the whitest person I've ever met.

What you're experiencing is a confirmation bias.

>>13463740
>I've been with my boyfriend
He was talking about marriages and not about fags sticking it each other up the ass.
Also 6 years is very short, compared to what marriages should be.

>>13458734
I used to defend Islam, claim that Islamic terrorism had nothing to do with the religion, and found it cool that apparently during Medieval Times, while Europe was portrayed as awful and backwards compared to the Roman Era, the Islamic world was using medicine and experiencing technological advancements. I used to believe that all women should be respected, always, no matter what, and only bad people ever treat women badly. I used to think that White people were lame and that Black people are cool, and refused to believe what I was hearing about Black Americans (13% of the US population) was committing 50% of the crime and that THAT'S why Blacks were disproportionately represented in US prisons. I used to think that Germans should have no pride whatsoever in any aspect of what happened during WWII. I used to think that Apartheid in South Africa was a bad thing and that it's good that it's over so that the whole nation, including Black South Africans, can partake in the Democratic process.

Here's what changed.

I actually checked the Quran and found it to have some truly awful and hateful teachings that regularly encourages Muslims to fight in the name of Allah. It says that men are in ownership of women, essentially, because of Allah. It tells Muslims to not take Christians or Jews as allies for they are allies of one another and goes at length to tell Muslims not to ever trust Jews. Fuck Islam.

I ended up with a hot little redheaded teen gf whom had a rape fetish, liked it reasonably rough, and enjoyed pretending to resist while I would act more dominant and demanding during sex than I usually did because I was a pathetic beta, so clearly, no, not all women should be respected at all times no matter what. I also came to learn of the divisiveness and lies behind feminism, realized that my mother has been a feminist all along, and suddenly everything clicked together logically why she always treated my little sister better than myself and also why she changed from being a nice girl who loved her brother to a lying, bitchy, slutty cunt who hates her brother and said she wants to wear pants when she gets married.

I began to actually consciously pay attention to race, I realized that Europe is where White people originated and noticed how USA/Canada/Australia/New Zealand are all English speaking nations because of the British Empire and eventually realized they're majority White as well. We are an extension of the West, of White land, because we came with vast technological superiority and did what mankind have always done; fight for land and to the victor goes the spoils. Fair and square.

(To be continued; you wanted an answer, OP, so I'm giving you one from someone who used to have a few left-wing views but have become quite right-wing in the past 2-3 years.)

>>13463756
Not gay.

How long was your longest relationship, and how old are you? I'm 24, so 7 years is over a third of my entire life. I consider that a long time.

>>13463778
>Not gay.
Being trans doesn't make it not gay.

>I consider that a long time.
But it isn't. You are incredibly morronic that you are unable to understand that:
-The guy talked about marriages, which apparently you aren't in and since you are together for 7 years and not married I highly doubt either one of you had a serious investment in the relationship, except that no one if you had found someone better
-He talked about Mixed marriages, eg. one black one white
-A trend can't be disproven by a counterexample
-6 years is a very short time for a relationship, in the context of how long marriages used to last, meaning many decades
Your personal experience is IRRELEVANT, just as mine, if you want to debate his point look at statistics.

>>13458734
>>13463774
I also noticed that when I saw security footage of crimes being committed, indeed, it was disproportionately Blacks and Hispanics, and if not those then typically White, and if not any of those then typically Asian/Indian. This also bears out in studies I read in regards to Asians experiencing/committing less crime on average than Whites and making more money on average than Whites in America. It, quite simply, made sense. Also while I was locked up, I had suffered personal harassment from a Native inmate who was a part of a Native gang, I think it was IP, 'Indian Possy'. His primary target was skinny White boys, and at the time, I was quite skinny. On that note when I heard of the theory that Blacks or non-Whites can't be racist because racism is 'privilege+power' thus 'P+P=R', I already knew that that was incorrect. Outright wrong, but the more I learn about the world the more I learn that leftism requires lies in order to be defended and supported.

I realized that, since Europe is White, that I should not be ashamed of my Whiteness or feel bad about it. White history is AWESOME! I heard the saying "no man wages war like the White man", and already being a big history buff (particularly for Military history) it was easy to see the truth in that. The trenches of WWI with the first ever use of tanks/planes/watches/chemical weapons in warfare. Brutal WWII with the biggest naval invasion in history during D-Day, the first ever use of nuclear weapons in war (and hopefully the last, though I guess DU ammo would count), and of course when Whites and non-Whites fought, the outcome was quite clear; either the Whites would win outright, or the non-Whites would win the battle but at FAR greater losses than the Whites. I'm sure there's exceptions to this rule, but compared to how it usually goes, the exceptions would be very few. Then there's Vietnam which had such an outcome of a Vietcong victory but at HUGE cost compared to America. Then there's Black Hawk Down with but a few deaths for the Whites, and hundreds for the barbaric Somalians. Quite simply, Whites are BADASS and I can't believe that I used to think that Whites were lame and should feel bad. As for WWII Germany, their economy was strong, there was national pride, and their Military did indeed kick ass with some of the best tanks and firearms available. Doesn't excuse the Holocaust of course, nor the fact of starting WWII to begin with, but none the less there IS some things that Germans can be proud of from WWII.

As for Apartheid; Rhodesia and South Africa back in the day were places of civility and advancement in Africa. They were the best, with good leadership and a solid Military that fought damn hard. Now, Zimbabwe has suffered starvation for having ungratefully kicked out or outright killed White farmers, which is now happening in South Africa and so we can anticipate that in time, South Africans will be pleading to the West for aid. Fuck that.

>>13463778
Looking at the data:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interracial_marriage_in_the_United_States

It seems that blacks just have divorces more often, the chart is topped by blacks divorcing blacks and immediately below that white women and black men divorcing.
But with Hispanics being a couple with mixed races leads to more frequent divorced.

>>>13463778 (You)
Not trans either.

Marriage is an unnecessary tradition that I don't wish to partake in, even though he is open to it.

>-A trend can't be disproven by a counterexample
I'm not trying to disprove a trend. You said that you've never witnessed a long lasting biracial relationship, I told you that they exist and I am in one, so the problem isn't that they don't exist - it's that you aren't looking.

>Your personal experience is IRRELEVANT, just as mine, if you want to debate his point look at statistics.
See the previous point. You shared your anecdotal evidence, I shared mine. Practice what you preach.

>-6 years is a very short time for a relationship, in the context of how long marriages used to last, meaning many decades
If you want your arguments to be taken in any way seriously, you might want to consider not resorting to cheap moving goal post fallacies. Especially when the concept of how many years constitute a long or significant period of time for one person may not be the same for another - and neither of them would necessarily be wrong. That being said, most normal people who aren't spergs would consider 7 years as a relatively long time.

Another interesting point about your pedantic need to constitute a long term relationship as "several decades" is that several decades ago it wouldn't have been as socially acceptable to marry different races because racism was a serious threat to personal safety, and international travel wasn't as common place as it is now which meant that people didn't experience foreign cultures and didn't meet as many people from those cultures which further separated races, nationalities and ethnicities from becoming intertwined. Ergo, there were several road blocks preventing biracial relationships from starting in the first place, let alone developing into long lasting connections. With that in mind, they nonetheless do exist and there are several examples in pop culture and I'm sure census forms can give you some insight into the statistics that you demand but seem unable to provide.

>>13463905
Meant for
>>13463807

>>13463015
>and is something that is intuitive to mankind.
An objective source of "evil" is not something that is intuitive to mankind.

>>13463905
>You
No.
I never said such a thing.

>most normal people who aren't spergs would consider 7 years as a relatively long time.
50 years ago people married to be together for 50+ years.

I also already said that I do not think the different races are the problem. The problem are blacks. See >>13463851 for actual data.
It appears that long lasting marriages involving blacks are what is rare.

>>13459012
Yes, gassing Jews can be reasonably described as authoritarian centrist and not authoritarian right. National SOCIALISTS, the hatred for Jews is partially fueled by the Socialist hatred for the rich, the Jews also weren't allowed to own firearms thus gun control thus authoritarian left in that element, but of course wanting an ethnostate seems more authoritarian right. Therefore, with elements of both sides in unison, the Holocaust can be seen as being conducted by an authoritarian centrist regime.

After I started thinking about it, it just didn't make total sense to call Nazism 'far-right'. With that name, being for gun control, hating the rich, etc.? No there were clearly some leftist elements.

>>13458826
Fuck this guy was a total faggot.

>>13458850
>just die already the post

>>13463822
>Whites have been on top for the past 100 years so whites are gods
>Whites have 100x the money that Vietnamese had and therefore it was a fair fight
You're not objective. You haven't judged any history objectively. You're jacking off whites for losing battles where they have a huge advantage of both funding and troops like Vietnam but that makes it even more pathetic. You lost a battle against rice farmers despite being the richest country on earth. Does that show superiority? Losing a battle even when you're hitting below the belt?
Try a battle against china in a few decades when they're just as rich and powerful, and then you'll have a fair fight. Superiority only shines in a fair fight.

>>13458826
Capitalism is the means by which excess is created, excess is obtained via taxation, and that taxation helps to keep people off the streets and in some nations even goes towards giving the poor some healthcare. Also, the excess created by wealthy people likewise go towards the lower and middle class. Whether it be by donations or by buying products that are manufactured/shipped/shelved/etc. by someone in a lower or middle-class profession, they are making money from the wealthy's money and if they didn't have it, then there would be less business and money for the lower and middle classes. Or, for the rich who keep their money in banks and donate little, the banks still partake in handing out loans to intelligent and hard-working people in the lower or middle class who have an idea or aspiration that seems likely to find success.

Now, if you want to talk about religion in terms of 'what is essential', I agree, people whom are religious (or at least Christian) tend to rate themselves as happier than non-religious people. Also, to my knowledge, much of the rich are religious. Merely by statistics this bear out as roughly 70% of the US are Christian but I can't help but wonder if perhaps the percentage of wealthy Americans are over-represented as religious (over 70%) or if they're over-represented as being non-religious (over 30%). Interesting thought.

>>13458850
>Spirit; Your soul is not of this world ergo the nourishment of your soul is not found in worldly things.

The nourishment of the soul is found with others. By denying the spirituality of life, Abrahamic religion starves the soul, offering to fix what it has broken by offering the illusion of nourishment that is the victory of solitude.

>>13458782
>Doesn’t post the full quote
Fuck off race baiter he was criticizing Israel in that tweet.

>>13464428
I guess he turned a few people towards Nazism by race baiting. However nothing of value was lost.

>>13459041
Back time stemfaggot.

>>13464281
>capital is its opposite and therefore good
Fuck off nick. Brainlet futurism is just stemfag hipsterism.

>>13464281
Holy fuck is this pasta you dumb nigger shit
VivaLasBiodome.gif

>>13461982
>>13462525
please show some respect, it's just koch brother now

>>13464428
>or better, no loyalty to a state

yeah, im thinking hes based

>>13464647
Are you gonna read his book now? <3

>>13464281
>interesting thought
Yikes. Lop off his head and watch the termites spatter out.

>>13458865
>Do lefties actually think the average conservative is any more hateful than them? Because all the evidence shows otherwise
They do, it's always entertaining to see.

>>13464652
nah i dont read, i just sneedpost on /tv/ for 12 hours a day

>>13464628
What are you even talking about?

>>13464638
I wrote it myself, it isn't copypasta unless you make it such.

>>13464656
You don't want to know whether secularists are over-represented in the rich? If so, the argument could be made that non-religious people are smarter and more successful than religious people. That seems like valuable information for a secularist. Or, if it turns out religious people are over-represented in the rich, it still seems like interesting information to me. I suspect religious people are over-represented among the wealthy.

>>13459444
lightskin mexicans or Cubans, basically

>>13460897
that's what was literally the norm in the US for a long time

>>13465255
Yeah and they were able to get away with it too because the world was filled with people who lived in mud huts.
Now less people live in mudhuts. Kill all your scientists and shut down your universities and ban vaccinations. You'll see how quick USA will lose that number 1 spot and go third world with low education, diseases and a lack of being leaders in science.
I know you guys hate California but that's where silicon valley is and that's one of the main things keeping America ahead. Face it, tech is keeping you alive. And America constantly imports the cream of India and China to fuel this.

>>13460781
This, but Shapiro is good.

>>13458734
The only way to become anti-right wing is to spend too much time with low IQ conservatives with really bad opinions. Fox news core demographic will rot your brain.

As soon as you leave that environment though, you will become right-wing again because leftism is to insane.

Get a job, incels.

>>13458734
No. No book written today outside of academia (text books or specialized literature like books on programming etc.) is worth reading, if you want to figure out why people do x then study psychology. I mean it's unbelievably simple, nature and nurture dictates who you are followed by the amalgamation of experiences you pick up through life, if you see patterns and at the same time don't have a sense of forbidden thoughts you can easily like or dislike a group based on experience—if you broaden your concept of experience to cover news or stats etc. then you can easily become racist by looking at FBI stats or by happenstance, like seeing a series of black people beating white people or whatnot. Now if you view these events as generic man beating man then you might become sexist, you might be afraid of men, you might become misanthropic but ignore race etc. if you are religious you might see these scenarios as evil possessing people, "monsters" commiting gruesome crimes instead of viewing the person as human etc. all views people hold stem from nature and nurture not one or the other, along with experiences, especially in childhood, forming habits. People will come out of the woodwork with ridiculous theories and notions of how humanity is so complex and unique yet you can group almost everyone into some sort of type or personality or label, myself included. But in the end, why are you wasting your time on something as meaningless as left vs. right, us vs. them, politics—politics at all really—when there are so many more important things to read about, anything pertaining to yourself and things you can directly control being the obvious, instead of falling into the same trap those people who "own libs" and spend their time reading some pundint attempting to cash in on this merchant class world we live in.

>>13458787
How does shutting down a conversation not legitimize it

>>13458815
Capitalism is left

>>13464428
I don't give a fuck what he claims to believe about Israel, I care that a hateful kike is diagnosing my culture with mental illness because it doesn't bend over for him and Jeffrey Epstein.

Could an American explain why they're okay and proud of the fascism in their country? Neoliberalism and capitalism are shitty everywhere but Americans really wallow in their horribleness.

>>13459760

Literally everything is political, burgoid.

>>13468732
It's his country as well bud

>>13464428

>or, better, no loyalty to a state

Based.

>>13468732
Jeffrey Epstein is just a math teacher, everything else is just a blend of conspiracy theories and antisemitic canards.

>>13468849
He's a billionaire

>>13458872
How do you define "leftists" in this context?
There were democrats that owned slaves and there were people that subscribed to political ideologies that were somewhat similar to socialism that owned slaves as well.
the ownership of slaves for most of slaverys' history was something that transcended politics, with the obvious exception of abolitionists and the republican party which was founded on being opposed to slavery on moral grounds.