/lit/ - Literature

>>8888199
socrates
jesus

you'd know this if you actually read him

Step aside.

>>8888239
>5'0"

HAHAHAHAHA WHAT A FUCKING LOSER

i may not ever be a good writer but
>5 FOOT NOTHING

AHAHAHAHAHA ITTY BITTY SARTRE

>>8888239
>Kafka was 6'0
What the fuck? I always imagined him as some little 5'2 manlet

>>8888246
>philosophical researcher
>on nietzsche's level

>>8888256

He would have wrecked you mate

>>8888199

Me.

I fully intend to be his heir. Not literally, but in terms of philosophical impact.

>>8888278
this isn't me

i have already written 936 pages of my philosophical magnum opus

>>8888199
Jordan Peterson.

>>8888199
Why did he like Callicles so much?

>>8888290
He panders way too hard to /pol/ alt-righters

>>8888199
how do you eat with a stache like that

>>8888297
I just ignore that part because it's not interesting. His professional work is way more interesting than the lame pop culture debate.

>>8888297

The alt right is the only interesting political movement in 2016.

Communism became a stale meme decades ago
Sixties style radicalism is quickly becoming a parody of itself
Liberal democrats, conservatives, classical liberals, and socialists have been unable to deal with the massive social changes overtaking the world

The alt right reminds me of a two year old who has just learned the word "no" and the effect that word can have on his parents. Imagine the chaos when he turns sixteen, it'll be fantastic.

>>8888363
>Jew memes is the only interesting political movement in 2016

friend, no.

>>8888199
No, he is truly sui generis among philosophers.

on a side note why is Schopenhauer such a whiny untermensch?

>>8888297
His ideas don't mesh at all with the alt right. They just happen to have a common enemy (SJW's).

>>8888199
for faggoty undergrads who have just discovered philosophy? probably not

>>8888363
> the alt-right actually believe they're interesting and free

whew

memes have gone too far

>>8888199
define "this nigga's level"

>>8888256
His personality wasn't in sync with his height
He had a manlet's disposition

>>8888199

>>8888705
lol
>>8888199
the only philosopher who isnt a footnote to the greeks, nobody else is on his level

>>8888579
Can you explain why?

>>8888756
>the only philosopher who isnt a footnote to the greeks, nobody else is on his level
>implying he isn't a footnote to the sophists and Thrasymachus

>>8888239
na just the manlets are at their level fmm

>>8888771

No one has yet been able to match his furious nigger vitality
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cvjgm_e454o

>>8888363
i can't wait for the alt-right meme to end
>>8888781
socrates and jesus were manlets tho

meillassoux and badiou

>>8888780
>Nietszche a footnote to the sophists

>>8888807
Please give me the real answer

>>8888857
nice le meme

>>8888363

>implying libtards and altrighters don't live the exact same google lifestyles
>twitter shitposters spouting greek sculpture memes will prevent the rise of a cybergenetically autoengineered elite

>>8888914
The only one I can even imagine he was influenced by was the sophist Gorgias. And that can't have been much influence either, because Nietzsche's goal wasn't simply to settle for nihilism.

>>8888894

Listen to the song I posted while you contemplate what I told you.
Some answers cannot be given they can only be found.

>>8889117
i get it now

Wittgenstein and Spinoza in terms of philosophers. I only place the three together because they managed to think so radically out of their times.

>>8889198
This is true, but sometimes I wish Wittgenstein was alive to see logical positivism destroyed.

>>8888579
>the NEET
>best rock band of the 70s of philosophers

I'm alright with this

>>8888199
Literally baby's first philosopher

>>8889462
what a forced meme

>>8888363
>first worlders shit-posting cuck and jew memes is the only interesting political movement in 2016

How is this even a question?

>>8888584
All cynics are.
>>8889475
>Didn't start with the Greeks, so doesn't know.
>>8889498
Seriously? No one mentioned Stirner yet?

>>8889498
egoism is a moral system, cuck.

>>8889550
>Muh atheist is a faith

>>8889567
>muh strawman
go fucking read a book you piece of shit

>>8888771

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4T4d075KDtg

Struggle is misery, you can't win at life.

>>8888199
me
leibnitz
david foster wallace
moot
wittgenstein
jimmy wales
homer

the list keeps goin'

>>8890316
>martin "what the fuck am i even writing" heidegger
I get it, my dude, but he is just a footnote to Freddy

>>8888199
>is anybody on this nigga's level
Any philosopher. NEETche wasn't a philosopher. He just wrote motivetional quotes for losers

>>8888199

>is anybody on this nigga's level

Yes. Study true Hermetic practice.

It is far more life-affirming than Nietzsche.

Can you give me even one non trivial insight from picrelated that isn't some lol so deep unfalsifiable statement?

This topic will include shitposting, insults, and incoherence, but we won't have non trivial insights from nietzche.

It is clear that he is a Rorschach test for pseudo intellectuals.

I don't expect to see anything deeper than "Dude, maybe Plato / Christians / popular wisdom was wrong!!!111" I figured that out after ten fucking minutes. I was just smart enough not to bother writing shitloads of books about it.

>>8890960
>I don't expect to see anything deeper than "Dude, maybe Plato / Christians / popular wisdom was wrong!!!111" I figured that out after ten fucking minutes. I was just smart enough not to bother writing shitloads of books about it.
It was a revolutionary idea in the 19th century though.

>>8890960

>Can you give me even one non trivial insight from picrelated

No. His shit was pretty decent but ultimately incidental compared to ancient thought.

>that isn't some lol so deep unfalsifiable statement?

This is you tacitly admitting that you have no real ear for him. I bet you barely see how artful the laid paradoxes were in his situational placement of aphorisms.

>>8890960

>Can you give me even one non trivial insight from picrelated that isn't some lol so deep unfalsifiable statement?

Why should that matter? Nietzsche didn't profess to be dealing in objective truth, nor necessarily even facts. He makes it perfectly clear that he is dealing with interpretation - just like everybody else, whether they want to admit it or not.

>It is clear that he is a Rorschach test for pseudo intellectuals.

Spoken like a true pseud.

Your whole attitude reeks of someone who longs for what Nietzsche himself called the 'Will to System' - you want your philosophy to be systematic, with everything clearly defined. In a way, you want it to be *mathematic* - arguments and claims presented in a formulaic
fashion, so that you can examine them in a black-and-white fashion to reach your binary conclusion: true or false.

Luckily for the rest of us, that's not what philosophy is about.

>>8888297
He dosn't pander to them at all. He thinks the alt right is a bunch of tetestable closet nazi's.

>>8888199
Stirner is on his level, in fact it's pretty apparent in Nietzsche's writing that he was heavily influenced by le spook man.

>>8890960
Does it follow from your post that anything that is non-falsifiable is pseudointellectual or am I mistaken and does that demand apply only to nietzsche?

>>8890960
>he still sticks to the spook of falsifiability

l m a o

>>8891561
Stirner = slave morality through and through.

>Is it not better to fall into the hands of a murderer, than into the dreams of a lustful woman?

Some level Nietzsche was on. No wonder he never married.
I mean, he's right about a lot of things, but it's fairly basic stuff that was already implied by Hume a good century before (Nietzsche differs in that he was a more bitter man and took that to its radicalization: just read "the idol" in Zarathustra, he rejects everything about the state and society in a very bitter way).

Much of his views is also Greek ideals regurgitated in fancy prose, with some atheism added on (and even that the Greeks already did).

Finally his will to power was already well defined by Schopenhauer.

>>8889253
Has logical positivism been destroyed? Can you recommend me some reading material addressing it?

>>8891633

>Some level Nietzsche was on.

Retard. Nietzsche's views on women were actually remarkably nuanced. He implies, for example, that they are the most cunning sex - capable of enslaving a man, if they choose. Given his high praise for traits such as cunning, it's not hard to extrapolate.

>Nietzsche differs in that he was a more bitter man

Not really, though. If you want a genuinely bitter man, look at H.L. Mencken - who was basically Zarathustra's Ape without realizing it. Nietzsche was genuinely someone who "loved his enemies"/etc.

>just read "the idol" in Zarathustra, he rejects everything about the state and society in a very bitter way

And why shouldn't he?

For Nietzsche, the state is the opposite of what it is for Marx: "The executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole proletariat/rabble/herd" - Nietzsche might say something to that effect. Indeed, unlike Marx, Nietzsche praises the state for precisely that. His qualms with the state revolve around the fact that it hinders 'Great Men' and steals their work/achievements/etc.

>Finally his will to power was already well defined by Schopenhauer.

Only retards conflate the Will to Power with the Will to Life.

>>8888199
Well he's not a philosopher, anon. He's a hack continental charlatan as we all know analytic philosophy is the only philosophy that makes any sense.

>>88916947
>He implies, for example, that they are the most cunning sex
Oh, I never said he doesn't respect them. On the contrary, there seems to be a fear of them, present, only thinly veiled, throughout his work. The man denounces chastity but then says enjoying lust is bad.
>inb4 he was just too deep for you
Yeah because innocent childlike lust isn't just self-denial.

>His qualms with the state revolve around the fact that it hinders 'Great Men' and steals their work/achievements/etc.

And I'm sure to a pessimist or someone who feels similarly slighted, that doesn't sound bitter.
Hume had the right of it: society is the only tool through which great men of all sorts are protected enough to thrive. Peer pressure in tribes is far greater, the individual far less protected. The only freedom you have more of without the state is the freedom to violence.

>>8891733

>The man denounces chastity but then says enjoying lust is bad.

He's operating with something akin to Aristotle's Golden Mean. Chastity is, to Nietzsche, just as abhorrent as licentiousness/etc.

>Hume had the right of it: society is the only tool through which great men of all sorts are protected enough to thrive. Peer pressure in tribes is far greater, the individual far less protected. The only freedom you have more of without the state is the freedom to violence.

Nietzsche didn't believe the state should be scrapped. He saw it as a necessity, but one that Great Men/Higher Men/etc should be permitted to transcend - although he does at times imply that transcendence will occur in any case.

>The only freedom you have more of without the state is the freedom to violence.

You need to read more Nietzsche if you think he has some sort of problem with violence.

>>8891758
No, I know he loved war and the soldier.
I think it's ironic though, Nietzsche's the kind of guy (rich upbringing, sensitive, philosopher for a living), who owes everything he is to the way the State exists, and wouldn't last two days in some sort of tribe or wilderness.
I think he romanticized war and glory exactly because he only read about it from his isolated, academic life. He would shrink from the realities if he was in one.

Not that I'm denouncing war or violence, mind.

>>8891771

>I think it's ironic though, Nietzsche's the kind of guy (rich upbringing, sensitive, philosopher for a living), who owes everything he is to the way the State exists, and wouldn't last two days in some sort of tribe or wilderness.

I'll invoke Schopenhauer to defend him here:

>"It is therefore just as little necessary for the saint to be a philosopher as for the philosopher to be a saint; just as it is not necessary for a perfectly beautiful person to be a great sculptor, or for a great sculptor to be himself a beautiful person. In general, it is a strange demand on a moralist that he should commend no other virtue than that which he himself possesses.

>I think he romanticized war and glory exactly because he only read about it from his isolated, academic life. He would shrink from the realities if he was in one.

On the contrary, he was an up-and-coming cavalryman for the Prussian Army in his early 20s, prior to sustaining the injury that would plague him with ill-health for the rest of his life.

>In 1867, Nietzsche signed up for one year of voluntary service with the Prussian artillery division in Naumburg. He was regarded as one of the finest riders among his fellow recruits, and his officers predicted that he would soon reach the rank of captain. However, in March 1868, while jumping into the saddle of his horse, Nietzsche struck his chest against the pommel and tore two muscles in his left side, leaving him exhausted and unable to walk for months.[32][33] Consequently, Nietzsche turned his attention to his studies again, completing them and meeting with Richard Wagner for the first time later that year.

>>8891692
Read Quine and A.J Ayer.

>>8891788
>tfw the horse inflicts the wound which guides Nietzsche into the world of philosophy
>Nietzsche's last sane act was to embrace the horse

>>8892009
Really makes you think

>>8888297
>Someone slightly to the right of Marxism-Leninism panders to the Hard Right

Come on, this is lazy. Watch his lectures, his protest speeches, and his interviews- the man does venerable analyses of the hard Left and Right, how they grow, and how they can be thwarted.

>t. Mutualist
>>8888363
>simplification of NRx themes combining them with memespeak and Rules-For-Radicals tactic, those NRx themes themselves simplifications of Evola, Spengler, and Hegel

>Interesting

Yawn.

>>8888256
>>8888701

What did they mean by these?

>>8891598
how so?

His readers

>>8893916
ressentiment

Havent read a word of knee cha

Where the fuck do I start? Dont give me the greeks, I mean what book of his should I begin with and where should I go from there? Just go chronologically?

>>8894290
chronologically or if you want an quick overview of his late work go genealogy of morals -> beyond good and evil -> zarathustra

>>8892009
wow.

>>8891692
>>8891791
Early in his philosophical career Ayer was a heavy proponent of positivism so it's interesting to read how one could completely change their own philosophical beliefs. I would agree to start with Quine and any Ayer that was published after Quine's Two Dogmas.

>>8888780

nigga the greeks are a footnote to hegel

>>8888278
Explain why you think this as succinctly as possible.

>>8888281
What's your thesis?

>>8888199
I'd say Spinoza, if I were to assume your perspective

>>8889498

His ego was so big that he made his style readable for him only.

>>8895067

>Explain why you think this as succinctly as possible.

Because I don't think there has been a single notable/memorable philosopher since Nietzsche, with the possible exception of Wittgenstein whose notability derives only from his word/language games.

It's been over 100 years and philosophy is in dire need of another 'Copernican Revolution' à la Kant/Nietzsche/etc. Nietzsche once claimed he was 'dynamite', and it's high time we had another explosion. If I cannot be that explosion, then I will at least endeavour to light the fuse.

>>8895102
Don't disagree (though I wouldn't qualify anything Wittgenstein did with 'only'). That being said, care to share some of your ideas you think might be legitimately original?

>>8895276
I second this. Keep in mind, you could be lighting the fuse today!

>>8895276

I'm playing around with the idea of a 'return to Nietzsche' (similar to Lacan's 'return to Freud'). That would only be my starting point, however. I plan to go further than Nietzsche did.

It's a shame he died so young, leaving a need for people to pick up where he left off. Still, needs must.

>>8895292
you haven't said anything.

Why did you even make that post.

You didn't even use words to convey any information.

>>8895310

Don't make me transvaluate my boot up your ass.

>>8895292
>ao I know where this treasure is, right?
>and I really excel in cartography
>so I can draw you up the perfect map to find the treasure
>(here's a hint, you have to go through Detroit to get there)
>but here's the thing
>I don't have any paper
>and I left my pen at home
>and only I know how to get there but don't have any GPS coordinates
>but I swear, it'd be a perfect map
>Anyway, Detroit's awesome
>too bad it went into the economical shitter so soon

>>8895324

*sensibly chuckles*

>>8895344
*sensible he's right though you know*

>>8895324

What did he mean by this?

>>8895363
I guess that the guy didn't answer the question

>>8894290
>>8894457
youre both fucking wrong, his first book was called the birth of tragedy

ehem

THE GREEKS

>>8895360
yeah no I was in total agreement with him, chuckling because I liked the analogy

>>8888705
This

>>8895292
>I'm playing around with the idea of a 'return to Nietzsche'

Ah, so you're ignorant of the past 100 or so years of philosophy. See you never, plebe.

>>8895944

>Ah, so you're ignorant of the past 100 or so years of philosophy.

What? You mean those French hacks who cherrypicked the parts of Nietzsche they liked in order to maintain their Liberal/Marxist dogmas? Or some other guys?

>>8896030

Foucault, Deleuze, and Sloterdijk each develop completely different readings of nietzsche, and each frame their work in part as a "return" to him. You think you're doing something new, but you're just another postmodern theorist. They're a dime a dozen. Get in line.

>>8896030

>and implying Foucault and the rest of the french "return to nietzsche" is marxist

you're really ignorant and self-assured, it's funny.

>>8896030
you are just such a hack

>>8896046

>Foucault, Deleuze, and Sloterdijk each develop completely different readings of nietzsche

And they're all terrible, cherry-picked readings designed to ensure that they can espouse all things 'Nietzsche' without worrying about abandoning part or all of their ressentiment-laden dogmas (Liberalism/Marxism/etc).

>>8896059

>and implying Foucault and the rest of the french "return to nietzsche" is marxist

Foucault was the definition of a Green Square Liberal.

Deleuze, like Zizek and other hacks, absolutely insisted upon his Marxist beliefs.

I could on but I'll spare you.

>>8896091

foucault is the reigning current taken away from the french post-68 experiment in philosophy. i'm not sure if you're really stupid enough to believe that bourgeois liberalism has anything to do with marxism, but as you say "I'll spare you."

>>8896075
>>8896091


Deleuze was a marxist, true, but his reading of Nietzsche is one of the most comprehensive, and if you disagree with that you're either ideologically compromised and can't read anything that forces you to look past your own pimply nose, or just haven't read him. You can disagree with the content, sure, but to call Deleuze's nietzsche "cherry picked" is just stupid.

Sloterdijk is also not a Marxist, though he criticizes Marx pretty fearsomely, and is an incredibly incisive reader of not only nietzsche but the whole of Western philosophy.

it seems to me that you haven't read any philosophy, and accordingly think your "return to nietzsche" will be anything other than vaguely neoconservative and unoriginal aristocrat-envy.

>>8896125

>neoconservative and unoriginal aristocrat-envy.
>He thinks Nietzsche wasn't an aristocrat with conservative tendencies
>He won't admit these two things have been airbrushed out of every Nietzsche reading/interpretation so as to make them compatible with pre-existing Liberal/Marxist beliefs

Don't complain when the world is rudely reminded of Nietzsche's most unpalatable (to modern, Western Liberal sensitivities) ideas - such as isolating/euthanizing the sick, etc.

>>8888701
me_irl

I wish I was a doll that men step on

>>8896189

no no, i wasn't saying anything about nietzsche's own philosophy. i was talking about your half baked little project, which will be nothing but envy for a class that doesn't exist as you imagine it does and of which you will never be a part.

nietzsche can only be called aristocratic insofar as he was writing at a time when being an aristocrat was a fairly decisive factor in whether or not one would develop skills, tastes, and abilities that could be considered genius, ubermensch, what have you. in short nietzsche was a modernist, for whom affluence and talent were more often than not linked. so his defense of aristocrats must be ruthlessly historicized if we are to make any sense of it in an era when "art" is pumped out by the rich at an unprecedented rate and is for the most part idpol dogshit.

>>8896240

but you wouldn't know anything about that, because you probably don't believe in historicism, in which case there's really no helping you.

>>8896200
>macrophile
cool
>gay macrophile
not cool

pick one or the other

>>8896030
Are you aware that Heidegger existed?

>>8896251

Heidegger was doing his own thing for 90% of the time. There isn't even much agreement over whether his "thing" (Sein und Zeit/etc) has much merit.

>>8896267
Heidegger was not doing his own thing, he funamentally followed Nietzsche's project and dialogued with the whole tradition of philosphy of consciousness (especially phenomenology).

>There isn't even much agreement over whether his "thing" (Sein und Zeit/etc) has much merit.
According to who? Analytcs? Also he rejected Sein und Zeit later on.

>>8896267
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr7CKWxqhtw

>>8896250
who said im a guy

>>8896267
>Heidegger was doing his own thing for 90% of the time
>>doing his own thing

literally what does this even mean, you stupid faggot

>>8896498
it means your a redart

>>8896200

I like tall girls, they seem awkward and vulnerable.

>>8890912
Zarathustra is not void, is just really abstract, like a "philosophy of philosophy". His other works use a more "philosophical" language.

www.thefoundationpress.com/thefoundationforexploration.html

>>8897088
>www.thefoundationpress.com/thefoundationforexploration.html

googled the link—why is this only ever posted on /pol/?

>>8897712
What do you think of the material? I never visited this board. Now I have.

>>8888363
>regressing into social Darwinism can 'deal with the massive social changes overtaking world'

W H E W L A D

Deleuze is

>>8891582
Not him, but what's wrong with falsifiability?

>>8897784

>Social Darwinism
>A regression

You're right, we should just keep letting all those Downies breed, along with everyone else who has a hereditary disability/etc.

>>8898636
evolutionarily speaking? yeah.

>>8898642

Nah. We should also be isolating/euthanizing the sick desu. Long-term sick, specifically. Those who can't look after themselves/etc.

Unluckily for you, this sort of thing is coming back. People shit themselves in Britain recently when they found out that most Scandinavian countries abort all of their Downs Syndrome babies. On the other side of the coin, euthanasia is increasingly no longer a taboo.

Only a matter of time, friend.

>>8898649
omnihumanitarian compassion is an evolutionarily invaluable trait. Societies that don't conform to it are at an inherent disadvantage.

So sure, euthanasia'll come back some places, some places it won't, and after a while it'll be gone again through social selection. I'm not bothered either way, mistake is what evolution runs on.

>>8889550
Stirner's egoism is not a spook. You would know that if you read his book.

>>8888239
>sartre
>5'0

ouch

>>8898665

>omnihumanitarian compassion is an evolutionarily invaluable trait

First explain your standard for measuring 'value'.

Then prove your point.

>>8898636
>>8898642
>>8898649
Evolutionary speaking yes, more diversity gives more chances of survival if a catastrophe happens.
Abortion can be justified before the development of the fetus reaches a certain point but treating certain humans as lesser beings after being born is despicable and it is the ultimate resentment of humanity. Feeling, thinking humans treated as nothing but inanimate objects and tools in the eyes of people thinking the can shape people to their own vision, repulsive. The only people who should be isolated are people like you, society deserves better members than you.

>>8898684
abort all fetuses

>>8898686
I would abort people who claim abortion is an ultimate solution to problems

>>8898672
>your standard
not my standard, it's just a case of survival of the fittest.

>Then prove your point.
They're the societies surviving.

>>8896474
Nice.

>>8888199
but he wasn't on his own level

>>8895067
good and evil is instead extroversion and introversion

the inferiority complex is extreme introversion

the extrovert tries to act better than a select group of others, so it does certain things

the introvert tries not to act worse than a select group of others, so it doesn't do certain things

idk a lot of that 936 pages is stuff that i've discarded

>>8898985
>good and evil is replaced by introversion and introversion
okay so not good or bad, no better or worse
>extrovert tries to act 'better'
>introvert tries not to act worse
you can't even give your thesis without using contradictory language. also, Jung tried philosophizing about introversion vs. extroversion a century ago, this is nothing new.
tl;dr kys

this board is shit tier pretentious signalling with no intellectual content
if you unironically browse this cess pool your a fucking idiotic narcissist

>>8899158
>okay so not good or bad, no better or worse
extroversion and introversion have historically been seen as different from good and evil so idk what you're trying to say

there's a difference between acting better than someone and not acting worse than someone

> Jung tried philosophizing about introversion vs. extroversion a century ago, this is nothing new.
yeah but did he succeed
>>8899164
at least we're trying you pseud

>>8899173
this is extremely boring and sounds like the thesis of an autistic, maybe emo highschooler. It obviously holds no philosophical relevance and does not sound like it can be warranted in any meaningful way, especially through genealogy.

It is interesting how the most successive leaders (CEOs, successful politicians) have mainly introverted traits but can turn on extroverted energy when needed, instead of living as an extrovert.

>>8899560
>does not sound like it can be warranted in any meaningful way, especially through genealogy.
pseud
>It is interesting how the most successive leaders (CEOs, successful politicians) have mainly introverted traits but can turn on extroverted energy when needed, instead of living as an extrovert.
>successive
you're fucking retarded and you don't get to comment on anything i say ever again

filtering you now

>>8888256

he was a Chad

Of bullshit? Probably not.

>>8890806

translation i cant win at life.

>>8890960

he taught you those things ,manlet

Nietzsche, Goethe, and __________

who fits here

>>8899882
Spengler desu

>>8888199
Me.

>>8899579

yikes dude. you're having a meltdown cause someone called your half-baked ideas retarded. struck a little close to home, huh? maybe you should try reading philosophy before writing it.

>>8898261
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability#Criticisms

do your own research.

>>8899933
i said filtered you retard

you don't get to critique me if you're this bad at using words

>>8899954

i'm not him. but i think that coming on an internet literature board and prescribing who "can" and "can't" critique your posts therein reveals who the "retard" is.

>>8899967
>i think that coming on an internet literature board and prescribing who "can" and "can't" critique your posts therein reveals who the "retard" is.
then you're retarded

>>8899954
>>8899975
jesus christ man, take it easy, just because you haven't produced anything exciting doesn't mean your world is collapsing. Take a chill pill.

>>8899993
i never said it was exciting

there's no need to say that what i've done is "extremely boring and sounds like the thesis of an autistic, maybe emo highschooler" especially when someone else asked me to post it

i didn't have to share it with you fucks

>>8900006

yeah but your whole idea is stupid and irrelevant.

we're helping you, actually.

>>8900021
i'm just not expressing myself well

>we're helping you, actually.
you're really not

>>8900039
>i'm just not expressing myself well
>>thinks he can do philosophy
>>>but i'm the retard

>>8900050
you know what maybe i am expressing myself well and you're too retarded to understand what i'm saying

>>8898684
>>8898695
So in other words, your entire argument is 'muh feels'. Glad we could get that out of the way.

>>8888363
the responses to this are pathetic. Shitlibs have literally zero awareness of what they are up against. I guarantee you not a single one of them could name a single actually alt-right figure. They don't even know where the term comes from.