/lit/ - Literature

what the hell is with "anti-traditionalists" desperately and smugly implying that the only alternative to basing culture around videogames and turning kids into trannies is to go full on ooga booga caveman, as if the concept of nuance is completely beyond their comprehension?

A lot of these 'internet extremists' of all kinds are actually spineless and weak people.

>>17682095
You are on the Internet. Nuanced dialogue is impossible here, we can only deal in extremes.

>>17682060
it's still insane to me that we literally carved 4 people's faces into mountains

>>17682095
>basing culture around video games
Traditionalists just play video games though, they only like traditional aesthetics
>turning kids into trannies
This entire website is obsessed with them. You can't go a single thread without cope seethe dilate wynbaw tranny, there obviously fixed in your minds. Not to mention all the futa porn and trap threads.

>>17682095
>

>>17682124
>Traditionalists just play video games though, they only like traditional aesthetics
never mind the fact that this is a blatant strawman, this post reeks of pic related

>>17682060
"Traditionalism" exists only in the imaginations of a group of 4channers and twitter accounts promoting an agenda for which I have no sympathy whatsoever: reactionism spiced with larping and morsels of racism. I don't believe the internet is an appropriate medium for serious philosophical debate; nor do I believe it is acceptable to try to concoct a philosophical movement online by using twitter to exploit the misguided enthusiasm of impressionable disaffected young men. I agree with Deleuze's remark that ultimately the most basic task of philosophy is to impede stupidity, so I see little philosophical merit in a "movement" whose most signal achievement thus far is to have generated an online orgy of stupidity.

>>17682158
seems like a bit of projection considering I dont play videogames and already made that pretty obvious

>>17682165
There's a big fucking difference between Marxism (what this comic is about) and being a "traditionalist" and playing vidya all day

>>17682185
stale pasta

>>17682185
this but

>>17682060
>RETVRN TO TRADITION!!!!
>WAIT NO NOT THAT TRADITION

>>17682124
The entire website is obsessed with them because the transgender movement has been rearranging and reordering modern society since 2014. How old are you? Have you been living under a rock for the last 7 years?

>>17682190
this comment is very clearly not limited to marxism, how could you have possibly come to that absurdly narrow interpretation? its very VERY clearly about being born into a specific situation and becoming absorbed into your environment that you've been immersed in all your life, but gaining awareness that things could be better, but you cant just magically wave a magic wand and change the world over night.

how the hell did you not realize this in all the time it took you to type that post out?

>>17682236
>because the transgender movement has been rearranging and reordering modern society since 2014.
>asking for rights and being seen as fucking human is "rearranging and reordering modern society"
Take your meds.

>>17682249
>asking for rights
there is no rights that they dont posses, they want to remove the rights of others like their freedom of thought and expression in order to better accommodate themselves

>>17682060
You’d know this if you read Evola

>>17682226
Trad patricians support pederasy tho.
>>17682190
Not necessarily. We live in post-traditional society, so you aren't really expected to do anything. I mean there's plenty of things you should do, but nothing really prevents you from being a traditionalist and playing vidya all day. It's a sign of weakness but not a contradiction. Like, you can be a warrior today by joining the military or a policeforce and you'll get to experience combat and that's all dandy. You can also join the clergy or become a monastic. But for many people these are not viable. So what's left? Many of the warrior type take up body-building, athleticism and machismo. Many of the priestly type live rich lay-religious lives. Under no circumstance is anyone expected to "rebuild" tradition as it's impossible by definition.

>>17682095
Purposeful subversion and mocking to the point of parody as a method of detraction/distraction. I’ll admit the /pol/ readers of Evola are often bad and rarely get the analysis right but the sort of analysis these memes mock hasn’t existed for like 10 years.

>>17682268
>freedom of expression
This was never a thing and most people that complain about trannies would remove any freedom of expression if they were in power

>>17682287
>Trad patricians support pederasy tho
No, we don’t. Just because some people support it and it can be found on some Greek pots doesn’t mean we support or think it’s even important enough to mull over.

>>17682268
>I CANT SAY NIGGER OR TRANNY IM OPRESSED!!!!

>>17682319
>No, we don’t.
well obviously you're not of the patrician variant of trad.

>>17682302
freedom of expression is one of the primary laws of the united states, and people trying to create hate speech laws which have already been successfully forced on several other nations are actively trying to undermine that principle
>most people that complain about trannies would remove any freedom of expression if they were in power
strawman, why arent you capable of actually addressing the topic at hand instead of attacking an imaginary boogieman you've build up to attack instead?

>>17682329
> you’re just not as based and red pilled as me
You people are so annoying. No wonder shit like this OP exist. You’re the reason. You might have left behind the dumb fash posting but you’ve just shape shifted into a new kind of materialist stupid.

>>17682322
>why yes, its perfectly normal for a government to fine/jail someone for referring to a man as a man

did you actually think this was some sort of scathing remark?

>>17682330
Nobody cares about your mutt laws, there's absolutely no necessity to call minorities slurs. Grow up.

>>17682322
the /pol/ face used in this image is based on a bernie boy who went ballistic. the left simply cannot meme without owning itself.

>>17682369
>dumb leftist trannies why would based /pol/ ever lie to me?!?

>>17682329
when a gay 5'4' lanky japanese novelist and playwright is the closest trad tards have ever come to retvrning to tradition.
when that absolute chad virgin of a mishima didn't even try to retvrn to tradition but create something new.

>>17682367
see
>>17682343

>>17682165

>>17682367
>you dont technically NEED those rights so I'm just gonna scoop those up and take em away from you
holy based, I wish rightwingers had as much balls as you, instead of wining about muh constitution and muh freedom like little babies

>>17682341
The majority of right-wing sexualism falls into two camps. One is a 20th century high-schoolers fantasy. The type of "coach redpill" brand grab-em by the pussy. The other is a Augustinian sexual manichaeism in which sexual pleasure is a necessary evil which must only exist as a missionary position within the confines of marriage. Two outdated ideologies. Why, you ask? Monogamy is dead. Replaced by hypergamy. It's not a choice, it's a fact. Second, large growth of bisexualism among zoomers/late millennials. They are just not convinced at sexual puritanism. Even the right-wing ones. Hence all the trad femboys and homofacist. The logical future of a new right-wing sexology is chad harems and homosexual lovers. Do I sound crazy? give it 10 years, I guarantee what I'm writing now will be the consensus on the dissident right. I'm a mad prophet. Also age of consent is a product of 20th century American feminists' and everyone knows it. No need to hold on to this shit on account of hysterical qtard boomers. The sooner it's gone, the better.

>>17682060
>'traditionalists'
Depends what you mean

>>17682430
The increase in femboys is due to the masses living a sedentary lifestyle, pornography and the mass media bombarding young men with anti-masculine propaganda. It's not because they're just not convinced by puritan morality. If the elites were promoting puritanical sexual norms, that's what most people would believe in. Most people lack the ability to think for themselves when it comes to these things. They just go along with the currently dominant belief system. What is needed is a new elite that can set things right.

Just out of curiosity how exactly do you expect people to spontaneously "go out and return to tradition"?

living off the grid in isolation like hermit or something like that is not "returning to tradition" just because you reject modern amenities. tradition requires being apart of a greater community which you cant really just "go out and do" on a whim as you suggest, it requires working within the current norms starting by first spreading ideals and building building up a movement from the ground up over time

>>17682430
Talk about a false dichotomy. Wow.

Also, if you think this is essential to Tradition then I just don’t even know where to start.

>>17682514
The Evolian method is "ride the tiger and uhhh uhh like watch anime while society collapses I guess"
Basically traditionalists are nihilists par excellence because they know deep down their trad utopia is literally impossible

>>17682514
Nationalists and radical traditionalists need to study Marxists to understand how to really return to tradition or create a new society based on those old virtues. The Bolsheviks were once even more persecuted and suppressed than current white nationalists are. If they managed to create the Soviet Union, we can return to tradition.

>>17682501
I'll take the fact that you chose to only focus on femboys as a concession that i'm correct or mostly correct at the rest of my post. As for your comment, I disagree. There's always been femboys. The Greeks called them catamites. In Europe, they were known as fops. I'd be a mistake to confuse femboys with trannies or femboys with basedboys. They CAN overlap, and do sometimes overlap, but not always.

>>17682073
Hahaha

>>17682549
Marxism is compatible with traditionalism. Fuck off bunkertranny.

>>17682549
thats certainly not bad advice and im not saying i doubt its possible, im just addressing the OP specifically because he seems to think that one can simply "go out and return to tradition" like one decides to go for a nice walk in the park or something. seems like a pretty retarded take to me

>>17682575
I mean isn't*

>>17682553
There have indeed always been femboys (and always will be) but they were never as common as they are now. I don't bother debating about the age of consent on 4chan. I do not think it should be lowered though.

>>17682060
OP has confused Evola with Rousseau, and "Return to Tradition" with "Return to Monke."

>>17682514
Marxists at least have the concept of praxis to make their fantasies seem actionable. Trads don’t even go so far as to pretend to have a plan. Some might think Trump was the answer but Trump and voting as a whole isn’t trad.

Both trads and leftists these days are young kids who are likely depressed and mentally ill. We don’t need to retvrn to tradition, or eat the rich, we need a more robust welfare state and to create a new ideological defense of liberalism.

>>17682605
I don’t think that’s a fair criticism of Rousseau at all. His idea for the state is clearly based off of Geneva where he grew up, so at least there was a realistic model for his philosophy.

>>17682588
You completely misunderstood what I was saying. I'm not suggesting traditionalists should be communists. I'm saying that traditionalists should take inspiration from the tactics they used to obtain power. Lenin's goals were retarded but that didn't change that he accomplished the impossible. People seriously just can't understand how astounding it is that a communist, atheist vanguard party that had been banned and had its leaders exiled was able to take power in what was regarded as one of the largest empires on the planet despite the population being highly religious and most of the world's great powers assisting the counterrevolutionary forces. That is impressive.

>>17682618
Your traditionalist state would be as successful as Lenin's workers' utopia was.

>>17682608
Liberalism is why they're depressed, retard.

>>17682628
So it would become a superpower against all odds? Yeah, I think so too. I hope it lasts a while longer though.

>>17682608
A more robust welfare state to create more unrobust people.

>>17682636
>let's install a fascist state to solve depression!!! Yep, that's it, no other solutions exist!!!

>>17682605
You should read authors before commenting on them, or you might end up saying something embarrassing...

>>17682644
But it will be completely absent of any of the ideological traits you espouse minus lip service. It would be a continuation of the liberal United States, just as the Soviet Union was the continuation of the Russian Empire.

>>17682646
Let's create a state that ends the opioid epidemic, reduces income inequality, seriously fights climate change, provides people with proper moral guidance, cares about the health of its population, doesn't deny that sex and race are real, and isn't trying to replace the native population with foreigners.

Other solution exists but that's the right one.

>>17682608
I think thats mostly because the biggest "trad" movements kind of worked by "siezing the moment" and then were obliterated from popular culture following ww2 with the last nail in the coffin coming in the 60s when liberal capitalism unleashed "globohomo" to undermine leftist movements by dividing the plebs and completely destroying class solidarity. any sort of traditionalist movement is going to have to be made from the ground up at this point unless conditions get so bad that we can "seize the moment" and captivate the public purely with moral and cultural philosophy again.

>a more robust welfare state
sure
>a new ideological defense of liberalism
no

>>17682657
The Soviet Union was a continuation of the Russian empire geopolitically but did away with its commitment to Orthodox Christianity. What I'm talking about would also inherit America's geopolitical goals and also discard its current religion, the woke bullshit. I don't really care if America is trying to expand its influence over the globe once it stops being globohomo.

Everytime I open a thread about Traditionalism on /lit/ there's only Brainlets talking about politics and trannies
no

>>17682367
Hate speech laws are literally at the discretion of anyone creating those hate laws in the first place. They can come up with a law that calls protesting the government "hate speech". Do you get it now, midwit?

>>17682755
Yeah except that's not happening.
>muh slippery slope
You have no idea how neoliberalism works.

>>17682367
>>17682755
They already call criticism of bankers and the media anti-semitic and any defense of white people racist. I don't think it's good to use slurs but important messages are being silences because they are called hate speech.

>>17682249
What rights don't they have?

>>17682763
Nothing happens until something happens. By then, it's too late.

>>17682249
>Allowing penises into women's bathrooms for transgenders
>Changing the definitions of words, using "they" to describe a person for transgenders
>Removing sex-based rights for women under the Equality Act for transgenders
>Adding new phrases to the cultural lexicon, such as "people with periods" to describe women, "cis" to refer to the non-trans
>Injecting children under 10 years old with life-altering hormones

Are these the rights that you're talking about?

>>17682102
Almost everybody is spineless and weak, especially on the internet.

>>17682060
because "tradition" is just code "my values"

>>17682533
>What is the God whose death has been announced? Nietzsche himself replies: "only the god of morality has been conquered." He also asks: ''Is there sense in conceiving of a god beyond good and evil?" The reply must be affirmative. "Let God slough off his moral skin, and we shall see him reappear beyond good and evil." What has disappeared is therefore not the God of metaphysics, but the god of theism, the personal god who is a projection of moral and social values and a support for human weakness. Now, the conception οί a god in different terms is not only possible but essential within all the great traditions before and beside Christianity, and the principle of non duality is also evident in them.

>The conclusion to be drawn from all οf this is that a group of concepts considered in the Christian West as essential and indispensable for any "true" religion- the personal god of theism, the moral law with the sanctions of heaven and hell, the limited conception of a providential order and a "moral and rational" finalism of the world, faith resting on a largely emotional, sentimental, and subintellectual basis-all of these are foreign to a metaphysical vision of existence such as is well attested in the world of Tradition. The God who has been attacked is God conceived as the center of gravity of all this merely religious system. But in fact this may open the horizon of a new essentiality for those who accept as a trial of their strength-one might even say, of their faith in the higher sense-all the dissolving processes brought about by the direction that civilization has taken in recent times. The "moral skin" falls οff a God who has finished υρ as opium of the people, or as the counterpart of petty morality that the bourgeois world substitutes for the greater morality. But the essential core, represented by metaphysical teachings such as those just mentioned, remains inviolate for those who can perceive and live them, remains inaccessible to all those nihilistic processes, and withstands any dissolution.

It is essential that men of the right abandon 19th-20th century sexologies in favor of new ones which posses viability and virility. You won't find either in Christian sexual morality. It's dead. The notion that you're going to hellfire for masturbating is a joke. In an age of atomization, prohibitions sodomy don't hold up. If you're not interested in such a discussion you aren't adding anything. Figures of the right have shied away thus far. They are stuck on old modes of thinking and are in infancy when it comes to a new philosophy of sex. Any White Male has reasons to rebel against progressive society including it's sexology of lgbt+gorrillian genders & rape hysteria. They could be straight or gay, solar or lunar sexual pathologies, it does not matter. I personally look at different societies, including Classical Greece and Rome, to get some ideas of what an "alt" philosophy of sex might look like opposed to current year.

>>17682947
>hmmm okay lets stop coping and accept gays, we must adapt to modernity
>20 years later
>hmmm well I guess trannies aren't that bad, we have to adapt somehow
>repeat ad infinitum
Such is the eternal cycle of conservatism and traditionalism, ideologies that conserve nothing and whose "traditions" don't stay traditional for long.

>>17682947
I agree that we should reject the idea that masturbation or homosexuality are bad but it seems clear to me that pornography and casual sex have a detrimental effect on society at large. I'm not a Christian so I'm not suggesting we embrace Christian morality but there are some battles that are worth fighting.

>>17682995
such is the cycle of conservatism, aka right leaning liberalism. not all ideologies that focus on moral and cultural tradition fall for this meme

>>17683013
>casual sex has a detrimental effect on society at large
>but homosexuality doesn't
???? homosexuality is literally nothing but casual "sex" (putting things in mens rectums)

>>17683013
>masturbation and homosexuality aren't bad
Not only are both a form of casual sex but the detrimental effect is actually ten times worse.

>>17682995
At this point we are fighting for the rights of White males to exist. Our old tradition is already dead. Having a hierarchy of values is important. It doesn't matter if marriage is monogamy or polygamy. We've practiced both in our past, and we don't need to stuck on Christian monogamy forever. Same with homosexuality. It existed in some form among the Greeks, the Romans, and the Celts. It became a sin under Christianity but we are not held to that forever. At this point, it's only a limit.

>>17683045
By casual sex I'm talking about sex outside of committed relationships. Two guys or girls can stay together for extended periods of time and I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with homosexuality. With that said, I hate gay culture so much that I wouldn't mind forcing them back in the closet.

>>17683051
How is masturbation worse than going out and having sex with multiple people??? That's even worse than masturbating to porn.

>>17683052
>At this point we are fighting for the rights of White males to exist.
Ah yes, because white males are being persecuted and massacred, despite them occupying most positions of power

>>17683063
porn is toxic for your brain. It's an empty experience , hunched over a keyboard watching pixels, which hollows your soul. irl sex is a group activity you authentically experience.

>>17683052
Might I recommend you play Hearts of Iron 4 or Victoria 2? I think that will really save white men.

>>17683073
>despite them occupying most positions of power
No, those are (((white men)))

>>17683077
I'm talking about masturbation without using porn but even with porn it seems like it would be less harmful than hooking up with some rando. I am against porn.

>>17683073
The media and academia constantly scapegoat white men for all of the world's problems and we are our homelands are being flooded with foreigners. It doesn't matter if those white male eites (some of who aren't really white) are white are not if they don't stand up for white interests.

>>17683073
The Whites in power are soulless sellouts who don't have the interest of their brothers at heart. I don't dispute that it's Whites against Whites. The thing is, saying "White males aren't allowed to exist." Is not just bound to the physical. An all out attack on European culture and heritage, and European being, is occuring. It doesn't involve merely physical liquidation.

>>17682430
>They are just not convinced at sexual puritanism. Even the right-wing ones.
A healthy, sexual marriage between a man and a woman isn't puritanism you fucking retard.

>>17683053
how exactly is a "committed" gay relationship any different for society than a casual gay relationship? the only reason the divide exists for heterosexual coupling is because committed heterosexual relationship produces offspring and cements and properly raises the next generation in an unbroken home. there is virtually no difference between putting stuff in several dudes anuses vs picking one, aside from maybe spreading less aids i guess. if you think gays are perfectly fine but are against casual sex then its pretty obvious your reasoning for being against casual sex is completely arbitrary

>>17682369
Its actually from the German imageboard "kohlchan". They call it "le kohlface".

>>17683119
>A healthy, sexual marriage between a man and a woman
Why is this the standard? Why not give Chad 4 wives like the muslims do, and let him birth 20 kids?

>>17683121
It spreads less STDs and prevents the psychological damage caused by casual sex. Casual sex is bad because it destroys people's lives and ability to pair bond. You wind up with a bunch of childless, sad 40 year olds who have no investment in the broader society. I don't want that. I don't see a reason to oppose homosexuality as long as they are serious about relationships.

>>17683137
Based, I support this. Islamic tradition is what will save the West and solve the incel problem.

>>17683137
Polygamy leads to less social stability because you end up with a bunch of incels. Polygamy also tends to be far worse for women, leading to more abuse and less happiness with the relationship. Even if they would choose sharing a Chad over having a loser all to themselves, most women don't want to share their man. I guess it is slightly more eugenic but it's not worth the costs to society.

>>17683162
>Polygamy leads to less social stability because you end up with a bunch of incels.
we already have a bunch of incels. And you're missing the point entirely. Stuck in the past, stuck in outdated modes of thinking. I don't dispute that enforced monogamy is eugenic. The problem is that monogamy no longer exist and isn't coming back. People don't want it. To tell the truth, ever since the divorce rate became 50% it was clear that monogamy had failed. Monogamy had already failed during our parents generation. People having "bf/gf/ at this point is just holdover convention that's slowly but surely melting away. My generation's Women prefer hypergamy and they aren't gonna change their minds based on what's more eugenic. You're better off encouraging sincere committed polygamy at this point.

>>17683158
That's the most retarded thing I've ever heard.

>>17683221
So far there hasn't been a serious movement in favor of sincere, committed polygamy, just polyamory.

>>17683221
I don't know why you guys have so much faith in polygamy when we already have a soft polygamist society and it has done nothing for actual birth rates. Current marriage laws are not standing in the way of women getting pregnant by whomever they want. You're basing your entire argument on the preferences of women and women prefer not to have children or have as few as possible. You may as well force monogamy because enforcing anything other than female preference is the same to them.

>>17683221
If 50% of marriages fail, then monogamy is highly succesful.

>>17683316
They prefer to have few children because of the current costs of children and propaganda. Under a different regime, women would want different things.

>>17683295
Watch yourself.

>>17682656
Hard to be embarrassed on an anonymous message board....

revolution when?

Traditionalists who are unhappy at this point are morons. You are living in the liberal order's final days. All you have to do is wait for it to come down.

>>17682657
United States, at any point in history, IS STRICTLY NOT COMPATIBLE WITH TRADITIONALISM
LEARN WHAT THE FUCKING TERM MEANS

>>17682158

>>17683697
Just a FYI for any polcuck brain dead identity politics zombies
Traditionalism is suprahistorical

>>17682322

>>17682388

>>17683712
>>17682322
Not here too, pls go back to /qa/

>>17683073
>Ah yes, because white males are being persecuted and massacred,

why yes. Didn't you hear about 6 million Caucasians killed in the holohoax? Their shoes are still there at the museum

>>17682543
>tradfags are just accfags but racist
horseshoe theory wins again

>>17682618
Why use Lenin when there are more accurate examples in Hitler and Mussolini is my question. The real qualification to your dilemma which you didn't consider is this: In all these scenarios, including Lenin, there is a major time of national crisis and social unrest involved. I don't mean coronavirus or relatively minor issues like the Trump spergouts. I mean issues that are literally bringing an entire nation to its knees in starvation, inflation, homelessness, etc. There is nothing comparable in the modern first world democracies because neoliberalism is essentially an adaptation to massively limit the potential for these states of crisis.

>>17683742
Not that guy, but your graph only charts Mexicans. It is true that Mexican immigration is declining, but immigration from other nations (El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras) is increasing.

>>17683989
It was far easier for Hitler and Mussolini to gain power. There was already a culture in place and native elites that were open to the ideas they were in favor of. The same can't be said about Bolshevism. Bolshevism was completely against what the vast majority of the people in the Russian Empire believed.

>>17684063
>It was far easier for Hitler and Mussolini to gain powe
No it wasn't. Hitler even went to prison at one point when he failed, and in Italy most of hte population was secretly hostile to Mussolini (which they displayed when they hung him near the end of WW2, when it was safe for them to do so)
>Bolshevism was completely against what the vast majority of the people in the Russian Empire believed.
The vast majority of people in Russia at the time were illiterate peasants who did what they were told. Soviet political commissars just replaced the priests who used to tell them what to believe. Modern society isn't like that. Not to mention, the intelligentsia in Russia, the people with actual influence, tended to be either liberal (like Kerensky) or socialist like the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks.

>>17684088
>>17684063
You can actually read Evola's thoughts on this in Men Among the Ruins. He was in favor of supporting the existing regime, by protecting it against socialist movements and further subversion and erosion of the state's authority. The idea that he repeatedly states, in other works too, is that when subversion is employed for political aims, the highest grade of subversion will always triumph. Socialism is, by nature, the highest grade of subversion, because it appeals directly to the sentiments of the unwashed masses who will lick it up. This is how Evola was able to predict the failure of McCarthyism after America's attempts to subvert fascism, traditionalism in Europe during WW2, and the socialism of China and USSR post-WW2.

>>17684088
>Soviet political commissars just replaced the priests who used to tell them what to believe
And the priests of this age are the talking heads on the media. The class you're talking about still exists.

>>17682060
It's been about 188 years since the day I shit my pants in the Kroger drive-through pharmacy on my way to pick up my Flintstones vitamins because I liked the way they tasted and they were shaped like funny little caveman fellas which was pretty cool too. Since the Flintstones gummy vitamins were becoming more popular at the time, more stores were stocking them instead of the hard ones, but I liked the semi-chalky texture of the hard ones, and the flavour was pretty good too, even though the gummy ones maybe tasted a little bit better. The Flintstones Vitamin Gummies also didn't have as cool of a shape, since they were only the head of the character, instead of their whole body, so that was another reason I prefered to get the classic hard Flintstones Complete Multivitamins. My favourite were the peach ones, because I liked peaches, and Dino was one of my favourite Flintstones characters, but I used to prefer the red ones before they changed the flavour recipie and red was also one of my favourite colours. Luckily since I went to the drive through pharmacy instead of going inside the store, my day was largely unaffected, with the exception of the fact that I had to rinse my underwear in the kitchen sink when I got home, and also a little bit ran down my leg when I walked from my car to my house, and it got on my sock and on the inside of me left shoe. Luckily, I didn't let that ruin my day, because I had 6 new bottles of Flintstones Complete Multivitamins to snack on to lift my spirits for the rest of the day 188 years ago

>>17684214
No, they don't believe anything anymore, not really. Nowadays people are educated enough which, in combination with low or average intelligence, leads to apathy rather than belief in anything. Political/philosophical apathy is the ultimate power of a regime based on pleasure (neoliberalism).

>>17682107
I want to be Hokage someday.

>>17682124
>Traditionalists just play video games though, they only like traditional aesthetics
why are we uniquely singled out for this as if nobody else plays video games

>>17684088
>Italy most of hte population was secretly hostile to Mussolini
gonna need a citation on that bold claim
>which they displayed when they hung him near the end of WW2, when it was safe for them to do so
Mussolini was tracked down and hung by a small group ally backed communist insurgents not "the Italian people"

>>17683121
Lmao no you're arbitrary. The only reason to label heterosexual sex less casual than gay sex is if you see sex solely as an act required to concieve children. This is typical christcuck lutherian bullshit. Let's say a man and a women are in a committed relationship for 10 years but one of them becomes infertile. Should they suddenly stop having sex to ensure they don't have "casual" sex? If not, how is their sex with 0% chance of concieving children different from sex in a commited gay relationship.

>>17683162
Funny how even when polygamy is technically illegal. We already see the results of polygamizing society in the massive amounts of incels we have these days.
It also isn't very eugenic because you narrow your gene pool by a lot. Gigachad has better genes for a resource rich competition based selection. But a group of tiny low-energy Billy and Betties with enforced monogamy would be much better at surviving a famine, and a lot less likely to go all mad max during a disaster in general.
I think polygamy is just the natural result of our competitive society. No one cares about the negative effects of polygamy, because they like to think the "losers" probably "deserve" to lose. This makes admitting you have not had sex for a couple of years more humiliating than admitting you've been through scores of partners.

>>17684781
>if you see sex solely as an act required to concieve children.
not him but just want to point out that it is not necessary to see sex as solely about procreation; it is merely necessary to see procreation as an integral part of sex. it is in the nature of sex that it procreates.

procreation is furthermore the foremost end of sex, which is not the same as being the only end of sex. The joys of sex are also ends, albeit lesser ones.

>Let's say a man and a women are in a committed relationship for 10 years but one of them becomes infertile. Should they suddenly stop having sex to ensure they don't have "casual" sex?
You conflate unavoidable frustration of the fruition of the act with an intentional frustration of it. Intention does matter here. The infertile couple wants to experience as much of the good of sex as they can; they are, as far as we know, open to its reproductive fruition, though that is denied to them. Whereas a couple that uses contraception, for example, is deliberately excising not only an integral component of sex but actually its primary end. It's like editing a song down to just the parts you like, which is already a crime in my opinion, but the song was also written by the author of the universe specially to be a song to bring us joy

>how is their sex with 0% chance of concieving children different from sex in a commited gay relationship.
butthole isn't meant for penis penetration

>>17682322
>>17682388
>>17683712
>>17683720
>you look like this
>no you!!!!
Well holy shit,I bet there are hundreds of people coping and seething at that.

I'm literally copying this from another reply I wrote in another thread.
I'm never going to take someone who doesn't understand western esotericism,jewish mysticism,hermeticism,platonism and neo-platonism/gnosticism,''hinduism'',occultism,european mythology and religion in general seriously when he talks about Evola,you absolute fucking hylics.
I'm also not an Evola worshipper either.

I also want to remind leftists that they can't possibly revolt,the technological utopia they envision will never happen either.
Authors like Ted K(as an introduction) and Jacques Ellul(harder and more detailed) come to mind.
Even at the time Ellul wrote his text,he noted that Technique had already become independent of the machine,for Technique had transcended the limits of (economic) production to encompass all activities.
Blaming Capitalism is therefore not at all sufficient,since the Machine encompasses far more than capitalism does.Technique causes everything to have to be considered in terms of the Machine.Progress is far broader than Capitalism because even its supposed antithesis Communism still fits within this same expectation that the only ''truth'' about human society is the technical operation to make it function more efficiently as a giant social machine.
In a perverse re-deffinition of the term,growth was once instinctive but is now rational (economic growth,technical progress,social progress etc..)
Both Capitalism and Communism accept this re-deffinition and only disagree over which method will yield a better result from a strictly technical level.
To believe Communism will ''serve the people'' is EQUALLY as delusional as believing Democracy will.

Leftists/progressives can't ''win'',they will lead humanity into a nightmare.
I'm also not an an-prim monke larper despite enjoying an-prim lit,anarchism can't work,and seeing you larp about a post-scarcity world makes me cringe everytime.
>>17684590
I believe he is right anon,Mussolini did not have much support.

>>17684569
i don't play video games

>>17682294
>Purposeful subversion and mocking to the point of parody as a method of detraction/distraction
This, read Men Among the Ruins. Evola outlines very clearly many tactics used to suppress Tradition. Once you get those it becomes very clear who the adversary is.

>>17682287
Based

>>17682060
Larpers, just like you and your friends.

>>17682124
Traps were far preferable pests to trannies. At least they could comprehend reality.

>>17682060
Extremist ideas are mostly held by weak people who can't perform well in society. And I'm not saying this as a knock on traditionalism, that's just how it works. If the status quo was traditionalist, beta LARPers would be the most likely to hold modernist views

>>17685429
Based and clearpilled

>>17682543
>ride the tiger and uhhh uhh like watch anime while society collapses
This but unironically.

>>17683073
Just wait 10 20 years it’s pretty clear where we are going

>>17685429
That's cool anon, where do you base this fact on

>>17682060
>jerk off to Evola online
Gook's perspective: I never bring him up unless I am talking to an IRL friend and they say they want book recs by me, which I often get asked due to me liking diverse books. Online is where all the neurotics, hostiles, psychotics, cretins and Americans go to and I don't bother. The internet was never meant to he taken seriously. I rather lurk or ask here for fictional books with specific themes.

I was rather very surprised to see people online shit on him so much (likely by insecure Americans or west europeans, who's culture I won't ever comprehend). Irl, no one did that when I first heard of him. Female teachers suggested him to us and called him a "mumbly lonely well educated man" or "a uni tier writer". Classmates seemed to like him. Never heard a single bad word of him until I went on the English side of the internet.

That ramble said, I also find alt-right faggots jerking off to Evola just as terrible as they miss out on nuances or take things too literally. They can suck dick.

>instead of going outside and retvrning to tradition?
I know this part is just bait. I do though, when it's not winter, spend many hours in nature. From exploring with friends to observing animals. Will start fishing soon. Just a more fun lifestyle. I was obsessed about animals since I was a child, too.

>>17685898
>I was rather very surprised to see people online shit on him so much (likely by insecure Americans or west europeans, who's culture I won't ever comprehend). Irl, no one did that when I first heard of him. Female teachers suggested him to us and called him a "mumbly lonely well educated man" or "a uni tier writer". Classmates seemed to like him. Never heard a single bad word of him until I went on the English side of the internet.
congrats, you got a taste of the damage that liberalism has done in the west

>>17685429
>>17685563
>muh horshoe
did you ever stop to consider that different types of societies select for different types of people? I think if we lived in Traditionalist societies, many traditionalist would simply be normies. Not modernist.

>>17685898
What the hell, go be an enlightened centrist somewhere else. Not having a point of view is not considered a virtue around here.

>>17686016
I don't know why, but specifically Americans seem to force label/blame everything on politics. Is this a cultural thing? Neither Jamaicans nor other asians or east europeans I've met ever do that and they, too, finds it strange.

I think there's deeper complicated issues than just politics that may have ruined America/Americans being rude and angry all the time.

>>17686118
I never said I am a centrist. Infact I quite liked the mindset demonstrated in quote in pic related. It gets things done and, at least in my country, is the mindset that's helped my people keep standards and prevent social stagnation. But not studying the "enemy" makes you just as close minded as a feminists or alt-right magafag. Learn WHY x and y doesn't work and why they developed x mindset in the first place. Don't just shrug things off without thinking about it.

Guenon (pbuh) talks about this phenomenon in The Crisis of the modern world: "Unfortunately traditionalism is not the same as the real traditional outlook for it may be no more than a tendency a more or less vague aspiration presupposing no real knowledge and it is unfortunately true that in the mental confusion of our times this aspiration usually gives rise to fantastic and imaginary conceptions devoid of any serious foundation. "

>this entire thread

>>17686242
>implying traditionalism isn't a gatekeeping operation to stop disenfranchised young men from becoming radicals

>>17686130
Many Americans and other Westerners shit on Evola because he's criticising the exact thing that they support, modernism. They can do it knowingly or unknowingly from enjoying its fruits. Also Evola = nazi fascist so he's automatically bad even though he's neither of those things and criticised both of these regiments.

>>17686275
*regimes

>>17686152
The people who think Evola is good or shit make a value judgment about his ideas, your post gave me the vibe "yeah don't be like the pussies who get offended by Evola's racism, haha but you shouldn't take what he says too literally".
I agree about internet discussions lacking subtlety though

>>17686275
I am sure he only worked with Himmler for the memes

>>17686254
We are now entering the yuri bezminov zone, double think is the norm. The technological society has nearly won.
Can’t I be a radical traditionalist? Is that what uncle ted is?

It's ok OP, many anons before you were also filtered by Evola.

>>17686275
You put it well. Especially the
>because he's criticising the exact thing that they support, modernism
>Also Evola = nazi fascist so he's automatically bad
There is no point to view things so black and white and to brush off an otherwise interesting author so quickly over something like that. He makes some interesting points. Sounds like western people tend to over simplify and rush to conclusions rather prematurely? We never bring up the fascist part about him from where I am from.

>>17682060
Am I the only one who thinks the mountain looked better when it wasn’t plastered with gaudy tasteless representations of presidents?