/lit/ - Literature

Evola. Have fun realising that any sincere fascist would throw todays right wingers in front of a firing squad.

>>9526412
>I can't seem to come with good logical responses to their arguments.
Gee I wonder why that could be

Read Catholics. Pius IX, de Maistre, Alisdair MacIntyre.

this post is hilarious or is bait

>>9526412
feels > reals

summed it up for you

>>9526430
I know right? It is strange. The liberals' arguments about immigration, sex, marriage, gender(this is the one I have most problems with) all seem wrong on a subconscious level but on the surface I am unable to find flaws in their arguments.

>>9526439

No.

>>9526412
Try using your own head brotherino.

>>9526455
>all seem wrong on a subconscious level but on the surface I am unable to find flaws in their arguments.
lmao

OP, turn off the computer and go outside. The psy-ops on this site are getting to you.

>>9526412
>conservative
De Maistre, Burke

>authoritarian
Basically any pope of the 19th century, read their encyclicals

>fascist
Evola, Yockey

>>9526470
kek

Turn back. Embrace Marx and fight neoliberalism on another front!
You wouldn't want to be in my gulag after the revolution now would you Anon?

Also, take a look at Gomez Davila.

Odds are you're disagreeing with them on an axiomatic level. Give me some arguments you have issues with and I'll describe my viewpoint on them - and hopefully not spark a debate.

>>9526412
>I know that I'm right I just need to find stuff to support my preconceived beliefs so I can win arguments
wew
Why do you feel the need to have strong opinions about how the entire world should hypothetically be run when you can't even sort out your own life

>unironically believing in things one can't justify

Whew lad

>>9526412
>What are some good philosophical or political texts that will conform to my philosophical and political views prior to reading philosophy and political theory?
wew lad. How about you read something that challenges your perspective?

>I have had debates with a few liberals but I can't seem to come with good logical responses to their arguments. What should I read to remedy this /lit/?
So instead of questioning your beliefs when confronted with logical arguments to the contrary, you become more deeply entrenched in your irrational views. Never mind OP, don't bother reading any philosophy at all. You're clearly not open minded enough to get anything out of it. (I'm not even joking at all btw, stick to TV or videogames or whatever it is you do with your free time.)

Hobbes

Everyone should read Hobbes, no matter what you believe

>>9526506


I agree with this.
>>9526412

It is possible to be a "right winger" and hate fascism (cult of personality, supremacy of the state over the individual, romantic nationalism, corporatism etc).

>>9526536
Genuinely btfo

How can OP ever recover

>>9526552
Not to mention fascists are often explicitly anti-religion, like Evola for example.

Fascism is left wing.

>>9526560

lowest IQ post in this thread

>>9526509
So the biggest issue that I have problem with is about gender. Especially the whole trans/pansexual stuff happening these days.

I had an argument with a liberal about gay marriage. My position was: I don't care what 2 people do behind closed doors, but the moment you start asking for social and legal sanction for the relationship(aka a marriage), it no longer remains your personal issue.

"Transgenderism" is a mental illness since it is literally the impulse to mutilate your own body. It is called body dysphoria, and was treated as such a few decades back. Only because of political pressure was it declassified as a mental illness. Trans people are mentally ill and need to treated as such, and "sex change surgeries" banned.

The liberal girl I was arguing with replied that by calling it mental illness I was forcing my subjectivity upon them. I need to account that not everyone sees the world in the same terms and these people have a consciousness where they don't identify as the gender they are assigned at birth, and calling it an illness is insensitive.

The debate moved from there to how gender and sex are related. Now I understand the difference between the two, but I do not believe that gender is completely arbitrary and has no root in biological sex whatsoever. Gender roles exist for a reason, which is the biological differences between sexes.

She then started to cite Butler and argue that even sex is a cultural construct and science is shaped by our biases, so it be open to questioning.

The crazy thing is, this isn't even some radical crazy SJW I am talking about. This is a girl in my English class, pretty smart, A+ student.

>I asked for facist literature again mom!
Return to whence thou came

>>9526536
>How about you read something that challenges your perspective?

Almost everything in the mainstream media "challenges his perspective".

>>9526589
>cites Butler
>not a radical crazy SJW

Anon...

>>9526589
>not a radical crazy SJW
>Smart, A+ student
>cites Butler
Sounds about right. Quit stereotyping the "other side". Yes there are lots of stupid tumblrina SJWs, but your friend has obviously done her homework (unlike you). Take notes.

>>9526617
>cites David Lane
>not a radical crazy neo-nazi though: he's done his homework!!!

I rate you C-

>>9526617
>>9526612

I mean, she has short hair and wear masculine clothes but she pretty intelligent. And she didn't cite Butler as an authority("haha Butler said it so it must be correct!" way), but merely as an example of what her argument was.

>>9526596
I'm not a poltard, I'm not even white dude. I am just a regular person who is against cultural degeneracy.

>>9526628
Anyone who is able to understand and discuss Butler's notoriously dense theory has some sort of basline intelligence. Butler really has a lot less to do with the purple hair and nose ring crowd than you think she does. I love Butler and you would probably be astonished by how normal and non-SJW I am. Literally a well adjusted straight white male. Thanks for comparing her to a crackpot felon though. Totally the same thing. I give you a D.

>>9526412

>>9526588
Benito Mussolini was influenced by Karl Marx, who also happens to be a critic of liberal democracy, which is what is actually right wing. He probably got the idea of having only one party in existence from Marx.

The idea that Fascism is right wing only disguises liberal democracy/ libertarianism/ Ayn Rand as being a lesser evil, when in fact that is what is the true right wing.

>>9526663
National Socialism =/= Fascism

>>9526686

schizophre/10

>>9526686
Essentially, the Right splices into a liberal/libertarian/anarcho-capitalist group and a monarchist/fascist group.

>>9526692
even Richard Evans agrees that small-f fascism is a totally appropriate umbrella word to discuss the phenomenon.

>>9526686
No, Mussolini was influenced by Gentile, who was strongly influenced by Hegel and to a lesser extent Marx.

And Gentile can't really be dismissed as just a fascist, and definitely not as a Nazi. Gramsci loved Gentile. On top of that fascist Italy had a policy where they accepted Jews.

Not sure why Mussolini created an alliance with Hitler. I'm pretty sure he personally didn't like Hitler and thought he was pretentious.

>>9526552
Am I reading this graph, right? German Catholics were less pro-Nazi than Prots, correct?

Christopher Hitchens sez otherwise.

>fascism
>right-wing

Yeah, try again

>>9526412
>>9526455

if you are not able to counter-argument a liberal, it means you are literally brain dead. liberals, especially contemporary ones, contradict themselves non-stop.

consider a career in sub-100 iq fields such as factory worker, office cleaning and such

>>9526506
>>9526552
where to start with Gavila?

>>9526412
it's pretty hard to divorce fascism from fear-mongering. it just wasn't made to work that way.

fascism is pretty much like socialism, but less romantic

>>9526771
>fascism is less romantic than common socialism

this is the most retard thing I've read this week

I fucking hate these cookie-cutter bait threads. Every single day another fascist lit thread. The only variation is whether it's meant to bait libtards or stormies.

>>9526651
>regular person who is against cultural degeneracy
Sounds like pol

>>9526745

well, if he said that he is wrong

http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2014/02/catholics-were-much-less-likely-to-vote-for-the-nazis.html

>>9526412
Conservatives would benefit from an understanding of Marx, who was a big fan of Balzac. Conservatives should also read more Rousseau, specifically his First Discourse and his Letter to D'Alembert. Thomas Carlyle, Henry Adams, and T.S. Eliot should also be read more by conservatives.

>>9526496
>not fighting liberalism with socialist, reactionary and fascist literature
It's like you want to continue the status quo

>>9527101
This. It's high time for a return to feudal socialism

>>9526745
The party the Catholics voted for, was in bed with the Nazis though.

>>9527499
They were basically forced to consent. Just imagine sitting in the Reichstag and half the parliamentarians are SA thugs, the president of parliament is a thug and the violent chancellor is their idol.

At that point you might start prefering your continued well-being to steadfast principles.

>>9526412

Are you aware that left-wing ideologies can also be authoritarian?

>>9526560
>>9526552
>>9526686
>>9526706
>>9526726


It's almost like the left-right political spectrum is descriptively useless and outdated. I still can't believe we use this retarded way of classifying political beliefs.

>>9527101
I have read Blazac, who I hold in high regards, but also Marx and Rousseau. I can't say it was completly without use, I would say it is more of an example of how wrong premises result in false conclusions and how you can debunk liberals wishful thinking.

It's worth a read, because the mindset is something that matters for right-wing ideologies. It's up for free on youtube.

It all depends on if you think a statement like "America first" is bad or not. To most right wingers this statement is just common sense; no shit you're going to put your country and its citizens above that of other countries. But to liberals it's a sin to display in-group preference. It's a completely different way of thinking.

>>9527060
>>9527499
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RSjvQYdVTQ

>>9527101
>Conservatives would benefit from an understanding of Marx, who was a big fan of Balzac. Conservatives should also read more Rousseau,

couldn't agree more, my man

>>9527551
fuck off, mike

>>9526412
>political(™

>>9526487
>Burke
>A notorious Whig who supported the Glorius and American revolutions
>conservative

>>9527101
Conservatives should really read French post-structuralists and the Frankfurt School, too. They actually used the Enlightenment to criticize the Enlightenment.

Conservatives had always good criticisms of the Enlightenments, but since those were always based on things like god and race, it wasn't taken much seriously. But Foucault and Adorno can be used to criticize the Enlightenment from within.

>>9527794
But the Glorious and American revolutions were "conservative" in the sense that they reverted society to a status quo ante, and were based on traditional rights and privileges instead of a radical new vision of society.

There is nothing wrong with a conservative supporting them, it's the French Revolution that conservatives are supposed to hate (though I, particularly, don't care much for the Bourbons, they deserve what they got, I don't lament it, I lament for the Fronde).

>>9526589
>I was forcing my subjectivity upon them. I need to account that not everyone sees the world in the same terms and these people have a consciousness where they don't identify as the gender they are assigned at birth, and calling it an illness is insensitive

This seems like a perfectly reasonable argument. What is your counter point to that know your perspective on mental illness? Because you could look up literature that challneges this perspective and it would be pretty easy to do so.

>My position was: I don't care what 2 people do behind closed doors, but the moment you start asking for social and legal sanction for the relationship(aka a marriage), it no longer remains your personal issue.

Probably because thats how politics works. I think you need a basic understanding of politics, sociology and the history of these issues before diving into reactionary lit. They won't have the asnwers you are looking for.

Try finding a class or maybe resources online. Read political science pre 20th century before moving onto contemporary stuff.

>>9527551
>Simian Sentiments
>Donkey Kong Discourses
>Ape Analytics
>Bonobo Brainwave

>>9526412
Anything by Dosty, TS Eliot, Ezra Pound, or DH Lawrence

>>9526589
you were caught off guard because the girl is well read and prepared on her arguments. Next time, construct your argument away from social construction issue. You simply can not win on their home turf. Everything will devolve to terminologies and definitions. It is a shame, evolutionary psychology is discredit so much because of the link to Nazism. I believe it is a kryptonite against post modern sociology. We fare pretty well on economical and political issues but we can not catch a break on social ones.

>>9526412
>logic
Somebody doesn't understand fascism.
>>9526535
Justify justification.

>>9526552
>It is possible to be a "right winger" and hate fascism (cult of personality, supremacy of the state over the individual, romantic nationalism, corporatism etc).
Not fascism.

>>9528495
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcUZrDX5P7A

>>9526589
>science is rite cuz i sed so
Fuck off
>>9528484
>evolution
>psychology
Fuck off

>>9526496
You can embrace Marx, but Neo-Marxism is the dominant ideology of this field. With it's supporters are submissive larping faggots too concerned with appearing righteous instead of truly fighting against class struggle. Good luck forming a left-wing leaning group that doesn't submit themselves to identity politics, irrationality and lies.

>>9528525
>the earth is flat because I believe so fuck science n shit!

>>9528518
I'm not a lolbertarian

>>9528585
There is no Earth. A non-thing cannot have geometry.

The Bell Curve

Any normal human of average intelligence can use simple reasoning to refute any left wing arguement

>>9526550
>reading outdated and debunked theories of government

>>9528659
>reasoning is good cuz i sed so

>>9526589
Then ask why pyromania, violent borderline and thinking one is Jesus are considered mental illnesses and not just another point of view

>>9528659
>feels > reals
>wow I won, it was so easy

>>9526412

If you can't argue the other side of an issue, then you have no right to your original opinion. Ignorance is not a virtue.

>>9527514
the zentrum was in talks with the nazis about forming a coalition before hitler's rise to power. the so-called "brown-black" (ie nazi-catholic) coalition was a major plan for fixing the parliamentary deadlock but the negotiations took too long and hitler being given the chancellorship made it all irrelevant.

>>9526589
you were right to be honest
she just said a bunch of soundbite-y shit that sounds good but doesn't actually mean anything

it's what they all do

>>9526596
awfully upset

>pic related
the first ubermensch

>>9526412
Carl Schmitt's Concept of the Political, The Crisis of Parliamentarism and Political Theology. Also Hobbes' Leviathan and Schmitt's lectures on Hobbes.

I would also suggest Heidegger's 'Building, thinking and dwelling' and his critique of technlogy. Also his Black Notebooks.

Then read Dugin's "Heidegger: The Philosophy of another Beginning".

>>9529391
yes, lefitst "arguments" are all feels, indeed

>but hurrrrrrr i feel like ima stwong women trapped in a mans ballbag durrrrrrr gender dnt exist okkkkk

>>9528665
agreeing to a simple social courtesy like calling someone "she" when they have a dick is not comparable to letting a pyromaniac burn down your house. making these goofy slippery slope arguments just makes you look retarded.

>>9529549
using pronouns arent a simple social courtesy

>>9526651
>I am just a regular person who is against cultural degeneracy.
How is accepting other cultures and beliefs degeneracy?

Fucking hang yourself manchild.

>>9529575
There is a fucking ideological war being waged on campuses and it's overspilling into society
They are passing compelled speech laws in Canada, and anti islamaphobe laws.
How the hell is it as simple as accepting other cultures and beliefs? You are incredible naive.

>>9529565
really? you already call people by various titles, nicknames etc depending on their preference and various social rules. if i met you and i was like "call me jim. actually my real name's thomas but i hate that name so please call me jim" would you cause a big stink about it or would you just call me jim? but if i said "call me jane" it's somehow as unacceptable as unchecked pyromania? explain this to me

>>9529575
>>9529549
So you're okay with over 20 different pronouns like xe and xir, and if you get it wrong you'll get fined for hate speech
and if you don't pay the fine they sieze your property
You're entirely fine with this?

>>9529590
I have no problems with using pronouns that people ask me.
I don't care if you ask me to call you Jane and your real name is John. I don't care if your trans.
What I'm concerned about, are the people who say they're representatives of the trans community, when they haven't been elected so, using legislation and linguistics to wage an ideologoical war and gain power.
What I'm seeing in Canada and what Jordan Peterson is fighting against right now scares the hell out of me.
Peterson never even said he wouldn't use a persons pronoun, he said he wouldn't be compelled to by legislation, and this whole thing is blowing up because there's something seriously wrong going on.

>>9529593
no i'm not okay with your imaginary scenario where feminists castrate you for being a man or whatever. i'm okay with being courteous to people who struggle with functioning in society.

>>9529575
>he thinks you get to choose your gender
>he thinks there is more than man and woman

>>9529601
That's fine. I never made such a scenario, i described what's happening in some provinces of Canada. The type of scenario i described is real. It's written into the Ontario Human Rights Code, if you misgender someone it's a form of hate speech and you will be fined. It's turned from objective intent to harm people to subjective.
It doesn't matter if your intent is to harm, i feel harmed and thus you have committed hate speech.
If you don't pay the fine, you get property seized.

>>9529601
> i'm okay with being courteous
so why can't they be courteous to my beliefs and stop destroying western civilisation with their disgusting attempts at commanding attention and feeling "special"

>>9529549
A pyromaniac doesn't have to actually burn down a house for it to be a mental illness.

>>9529599
>people who say they're representatives of the trans community, when they haven't been elected so, using legislation and linguistics

what? how is this different from civil rights or gay rights or whatever? do you think mlk was elected in a formal vote by all american blacks? you're spinning this fantasy out of some extremely mundane shit.

>>9529616
If they aren't elected to represent the community, they aren't representatives. It's as simple as that.

>>9529616
>how is this different from civil rights or gay rights or whatever?

It's not illegal to say nigger or faggot. But at least in Canada under the new legal framework it would be illegal to not use someone's preferred pronoun(Which is also true for some American states, like New York).

Which is ridiculous. I mean, you can ask me respectfully if I can use whatever pronoun, but the moment you introduced state coercion into the picture we are automatically enemies.

>>9529608
>i described what's happening in some provinces of Canada

okay, please list, let's say, five cases where refusal to say the word "xir", and this refusal alone, resulted in the confiscation of a persons property. this is the specific scenario you described, and if it's not your invention then there's obviously documentation of these cases available.

>>9529615
and your point is...?

>>9529633
My point is that it didn't help transpeople that their gender dysphoria was no longer classified as a mental illness.

I mean, even after transitioning(Which presumably should solve their problems), transpeople have orders of magnitude higher suicide rate then the rest of the general population, which begs the question whether sexual reassignment surgery is a good idea.

>>9529629
>okay, please list, let's say, five cases where refusal to say the word "xir", and this refusal alone, resulted in the confiscation of a persons property.

Well it will happen in the future, because now it's law in Canada.

What is going to happen is that someone will refuse to use a pronoun, be pulled in front of the Social Justice Tribunal and be given a fine.

If they refuse the fine they will be held in contempt of court and go to jail.

>>9529620
so all minority rights movements are illegitimate by definition? you cannot be an elected representative of trans people unless they become legally recognized and they will not be legally recognized unless someone representing them lobbies for their legal recognition. it sure as hell seems like you're just using bullshit rhetoric to deny people the right to be heard.

>>9529644
Haha rekt

>>9529636
>Defintion of transitioning is reassignment surgery

What?

>>9529653
That's one way of looking at it, another is that it constitutes totalitarianism.

>>9529646
Why are you getting your panties twisted up in a bunch?
These people pushing this shit are not representatives of the trans community, you are pulling up other shit that isn't related to this.
I can't just go out there and say i'm a fucking representative of straight white males unless they fucking vote for me to represent their interests
Why are you making this so difficult?

>>9529623
http://sds.utoronto.ca/blog/bill-c-16-no-its-not-about-criminalizing-pronoun-misuse/

>>9529655
How does transitioning not constitute reassignment surgery?

>>9529668
People transition by coming out. It's not necessary for transgender people to undergo surgery to be considered transgender.

>>9529666
see
>>9529644

>>9526412
i just read some bentham. he pretty much destroys all right wing thought as retardation based on personal feelings rather than logic. keyword being logic, which should prevent right wingers from using the same argument towards the left. it follows there is no good right wing literature based on universal principles, but there is plenty on selective and irrational ones. you could also just fuck off back to /pol/

Man, what is happening right now has always happened in history

>new values are accepted by status quo
>angry young men salty about new values
>they stay salty for 10 or so more years
>new generation grows up with these values and simply accepts them
>rinse and repeat
In 50 years Donald Trump, Alt-Right, Dark Enlightenment, Kek and all that pseudo-intellectual shit will be looked back upon as the final spasm of the pre-globalist world. Deal with it.

>>9529672
No, but it is presumably necessary for transgender people to have reassignment surgery to cure their gender dysphoria.

>>9529673
Maybe you should read the link.

>>9529644
>Well it will happen in the future

oooh, so the scenario you claimed to be real is not, in fact, real, but rather something you imagined! what a surprise!

nevertheless, i deeply sympathize with your imaginary martyrdom. this very moment i'm imagining setting up a kickstarter to purchase back all the property you do not yet own but might purchase and stand to lose if you hypothetically misgender an imaginary person after possibly moving to an unspecified part of canada.

please include your potential future canadian address so i know where to imagine sending all the things you didn't lose.

i will be sending them from the fema internment camp where i expect to be living once hillary retroactively steals the election and uses her emergency powers to make being a man illegal. you see, i am a pretend victim of a hypothetical oppression as well. we have to stick together, or at least imagine we do.

>>9529666
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnIAAkSNtqo
It's so fucking disgusting.
They bring up shit like "espousing genocide" and bringing up Petersons Academic "power" and "authority" over his students just to muddle the waters.

>>9529684
It isn't.

>>9529666
>lol no you're wrong im right
Also, the fact that Jordan Peterson is making headlines means that this is dangerous ground we're treading on, and this is very dangerous legislation. It will do more harm than the intended good. We shouldn't believe a law is just just because it intends to do good.

ITT: weak, unemployed and degenerate beta SJW "men" who consider themselves /lit/ for having read two or three pieces of radical feminist "literature" who try to fill the abyss of their mediocrity by policing other people who refuse to enable the mental illness of "trans" people.

go on then, address every schizophrenic who consider himself napoleon as "your imperal majesty".

fucking beta cucks, I can't wait to see all of you beheaded by the sharia police once it is enforced by your beloved """refugees"""

>>9529687
>Maybe you should read the link.

And maybe you should read what I wrote. The provincial Social Justice Tribunals in Canada have federal authority to hold people in contempt of court, and contempt of court is punishable by jail time.

>>9529679
Nah, this is an ideological war. These "new values" you talk about, are people hacking away at our very foundations.
Denying gender differences isn't a new value. It's nonsense that's being espoused on campuses.

>>9529688
Being condescending isn't an argument.

>>9529666
>sexual diversity studies
LMFAO!!!!!!!
How about form your own arguments, and read the bill yourself instead of spamming ideologue links at people.

>>9529698
It's the same legislation as any other discrimination law.

>>9529684
presumed by whom? it's actually a major issue in current trans circles to stop obsessing over surgery because lots of people don't want it and the long term psychological effects are debatable. there's no "cure" for gender dysphoria, it's just various attempts at making people function better. in 20 years there might be a magic pill that makes you not care about what gender you are and lots of people will take it.

>>9529700
Again, maybe you should read the link.

>>9529713
It's not, actually. It writes that your identity is subjective into law.

>>9529718
I did read it. And the person who wrote it obviously didn't listen to Peterson's arguments at all, and neither did you.

>>9529699
Right and we should enable you by saying you raise a good point and you're really smart.

>>9529713
You can't say things is not the same as you have to say things.
They are not the same as "any other" discrimination law

>>9529714
>in 20 years there might be a magic pill that makes you not care about what gender you are and lots of people will take it.

Lets hope there's a pill in 20 years that stop people from being authoritarian leftists who want to control language instead.

>>9529711
How about you read the bill and point out where the problem lies.

>>9526412
>the liberals
Side question: why are Americans always using the word "liberal" completely wrong nowadays?
"Liberal" is derived from the Latin word "liber" which means "free".
A liberal is someone who wants a free society with as few governmental authority, intervention and control as possible. Ayn Rand was a liberal for example.
Why the fuck are you using it as if "liberal" means "leftist"? It simply doesn't.

>>9529708
>Nah, this is an ideological war.
ok, where is it fought though? Because the vast majority of Western countries seem to embrace liberalism and globalism. DT was only elected because Hillary was such a shite candidate. Brexit happened because Brits have never felt European in their history. Yet somehow MSM is pushing this whole "End of Liberal World Order?" narrative. As if Obama wasn't an illiberal leader.

>>9529722

shall I take this "witty" answer as proof that you have no counter argument?

>>9529728
I have, and it has.
You can watch the senate hearing on Bill C-16 if you want to get a more coherent version of the argument against the bill.
https://youtu.be/KnIAAkSNtqo

>>9529719
You can't discriminate based on religion either.

>>9529734
Probably not.

>>9529733
Campuses, obviously.
>Trump won because Hillary was shit
Lol okay dude. Pretty one dimensional way of looking at it. Trump ran a very successful campaign

Probably the best attacks on liberalism and the like I have read have come from

Nietzsche, Foucault, Stirner, Débord, Baudrillard, Mencken, Bonnano and a few others. Moldbug is good for a laff.

The best critiques if the current world order is that it is hideous and that it makes the world flat, ugly, cold and that it turns men into venal rats with no heroic qualities.

>>9529731
Liberals are not leftists. The Democratic Party is simply not a leftist party, but because the USA is such a right-wing country they consider the Dems leftist (and because of the dreadful two party system). Thus 'liberal' and 'leftist' are conflated. Liberalism adhere 'negative freedom' i.e. freedom from external obstacles. Nietzsche hated negative freedom / liberalism for example, which is why Rand is such a shit thinker.

>>9529738
I still can't see you using any though. how curious

>>9529739
>Campuses, obviously.
Okay, where? You mean a handful of elite American universities the rest of the West doesn't give a shit about? You mean two groups of 20 Antifa's and 30 /pol/acks throwing stuff at each other from a distance? Such a culture war bro!

>>9529736
Discrimination =/= Ordering people on the threat of government coercion to use words you learned in your Gender Studies class at UofT.

>>9529710
well your theory was that by calling someone with a dong "she" i am implicitly supporting a conspiracy by pretend-representatives of transpeople to extort vast sums of money from random victims by inventing spurious genders and then extracting fines for not respecting the pronouns. i asked you for evidence of this extortion and it turned out you merely imagine it happening in the future based on your expert interpretation of canadian law.

if my posts sound condescending it's only because i think you're pretty stupid and not worth talking to seriously.

>>9529748
Brownshirts and Redshirts were just two groups of 20 and 30 fighting in the streets at some point in the 1920s too you know.

It very quickly got worse.

>>9529679
>new values
Historically speaking, Western values were the same for almost two millennia. A constant liberalization of values towards some sort of libertarian anything goes attitude is a fairly new phenomenon which emerged with the industrialization and its alienation of worker and product. This development cannot lead to stability. Fascism and communism were backlashes against this recent development of western universalism and a new form of antiliberalism is slowly emerging in Europe which synthesizes Nouvelle Droite philosophy, reactionary conservatism, traditional religion and right wing populism. If this third push against liberalism will be successful remains to be seen however.

>>9529735
>Correct gendering is hard to remember!

Yeah that will get you 10 years in the slammer.

Do you have a point or do you expect me to a) believe you that you have read anything you have claimed to read since you offer no proof other than your word, and b) sit through an hour of debate, c) that this is any different to any other discrimination law

>>9529725
the liberal desire to fix everything by instituting rigid etiquette is merely a desperate attempt to replace basic human courtesy, which is disappearing from the world. the actual problem is that you are an animal, raised by animals.

>>9529743
Yeah there's not much point in a bait post. If you don't want bants, don't encourage bants. If you want debate, be a neutral, rational person.

>>9526412
if you think "liberal" and "left" are interchangeable you probably need to start with the absolute basics

>>9529753
That must of been someone else you were talking to then, because I never claimed that there was any conspiracy to extract money from people.

What I do claim however is that there is a conspiracy to control language and the narrative of society. And that narrative is now owned by pseudo-intellectual and bourgeois left liberals.

>>9529749
True, and this is a discrimination bill.

>>9529756
>It very quickly got worse.
Yup, because multiple European countries where completely devastated by war and the biggest economic depression to date. Totally the same bruh

>>9529760
A hilarious post, as expected from the dark enlightenment pseuds. Full of name dropping and an overly simplistic view of history.

>Historically speaking, Western values were the same for almost two millennia.
Hilarious, do I even need to reply? Okay, let's try. What about Enlightenment? What about Renaissance? What about the Twelfth Century?

>Nouvelle Droite philosophy, reactionary conservatism, traditional religion and right wing populism
So they synthesize the same stuff?

>>9529763

My post was not bait. I am perfectly rational, and one cannot be neutral in such an argument. It's like debeating on the fact that water is wet. if you claim anything other than that you are either mentally ill, or your logic is being misguided my moral (-> illogic) arguments.

>>9529765
There's a conspiracy to refine the law when new issues in society arise, as has always been the conspiracy in regards to the law. Do you think trans people are all liberals and bourgeois?

>>9529773
>I am perfectly rational

Yes you are sweetie :)

If you ever wonder why there's no good right-wing literature look no further than this thread. Objectively garbage writing.

>>9529760
>If this third push against liberalism
What push? Marcon won in a landslide victory. Dutch Wilders received a mere 13% of the vote. The Austrian guy lost. Germany is set for a SPD win later this year. Where is the push? It's just an overhyped phenomenon pushed by American outlets to make sense of the fact that their shitty country elected a retard. Well hey, America, your country elected him because your country is trash! Get over it. This has nothing to do with some unique historic phenomenon of a reaction on Western 'universalism' or what you edgy kids use these days. I hope this fad will die out soon.

>>9529731
"liberal" functions in america as a shorthand for "supports mainline democratic party" which currently makes you a centrist who believes in mildly regulated global capitalism with some socially progressive gestures. if the headline "female ceo speaks out" makes you wet, you're a liberal. none of this has anything to do with being a leftist.

plus, this shit where words are supposed to only mean what their latin roots meant is stupider than "xir"

>>9526422
This is very true. 'Right-wingers' today are just disenfranchised whites with no mainstream cultural product (until Trump) to base their identity on.

>>9529774
There literally is no issue in society at present, other than the harrowing whining of extremely wealthy left liberals who feel they have to push their Enlightenment ideals down the throat of everyone.

It's quite ironic that they constantly harp about the evils of imperialism, when they literally can't stop being imperialistic with their ideology.

>>9529783
Please stop saying America voted for Trump. Most of us didn't. The Russian government manipulated swing state voters by pushing pizzagate and other stories. This has all been documented and is coming to public attention.

>>9529790
You can kill yourself st any moment libtard

>>9529789
Dismissing contemporary developments is what defunct ideological systems do. It happened in the 60s with modernism, it's what happened with Third Way leftists and Trump.

>>9529790
>The Russian government manipulated swing state voters by pushing pizzagate and other stories

Lol, do you actually believe this? Talk about schizopolitics.

>>9529796
Found the Russian.

>>9529796
It has been stated by several intelligence agencies. You can choose not to believe it if you want. It's not much different from American interference in other elections.

>>9529772
I do not identify with the so-called dark enlightenment or their particular views. I'm a leftwing conservative.

>Hilarious, do I even need to reply? Okay, let's try. What about Enlightenment? What about Renaissance? What about the Twelfth Century?
How did these movements adress the values of everyday life? Did they do away with the notions of Good and Evil? With the family as the central unit of human society? Did they question the natural order of man and woman?

Maybe they questioned God, the Church and human purpose and the movement of the stars. But this questioning of ideas was qualitatively different from our modern questioning of values. Modern society promotes its own unravelling in the name of greater liberty and progress. No society ever did this.

>>9529802
>It has been stated by several intelligence agencies.

Well I will never ever believe a word intelligence agencies say to the public, because whatever they say has been bureaucratically tailored through 15 layers of duplicity.

>>9529765
>because I never claimed that there was any conspiracy to extract money from people.

wait so that whole series of posts about confiscating property when you don't say "xir" was not you? hmm.

>conspiracy to control language and the narrative of society

in other words, you cannot substantiate the specific claims you make so you retreat into this vague shit about the jew stealing your erections. things like "confiscating property" can be verified so now you pretend you never said that, now the thing being stolen from you is language, narrative, society... snip snip goes the nightmare feminist

>>9529802
Remember when intelligence agencies told us Iraq had weapons so bush could attack them. Remember when Obama manipulated them to say Russians hacked the elections. Btw where's the evidence

>>9529814
Well they can confiscate your property.

Did you even read this >>9529666

Because quite clearly says that failure to abide by the legal framework of the bill can engender monetary payments.

Perhaps money isn't property in your world?

>>9529779

>can't counter-argue
>meme instead

pathetic

>>9529783
First of all, I'm European and the guy's name is Macron. Furthermore we are only at the beginning of this social reaction to excessive liberalism. The far right parties were already successful enough for mainstream conservative parties to copy their talking points. This in turn will lead to a mainstreaming of far right ideas. Just look at what May is doing in Britain, what Rutte is doing in the Netherlands and what Kurz is doint in Austria. And in the long run they'll either replace the far right by becoming themselves qualitatively far right or they'll be unable to satisfy demand for far right policies which will in turn lead to a greater influence of preexisting far right parties. And if you think there is no way such parties could ever rule you're not looking straight. Poland and Hungary are already setting examples. Austria has just scheduled new elections.

>>9529784
>this shit where words are supposed to only mean what their latin roots meant
That wasn't my intention. I just have the slight feeling there's a trend towards an illegitimate simplification which seems to eliminate a whole dimension of political thinking in the US.

You can be left or right in your political views. But you can also be liberal or authoritarian. If you automatically identify the one thing with the other you just simplify things and restrict your ability to think politically thereby.
For example Marxism (left) and Fascism (right) are both authoritarian and antiliberal. It just makes me cringe if someone says a Marxist is a liberal. (That's why I used Rand as an example, because she's as anti Marxist as it gets.) But the use of the word "liberal" in the US seems to point in that direction.

>>9529820
Can't... or won't? Use logic, bimbo.

>>9529818
>Did you even read this

did you? the monetary reparations are in relation to businesses discriminating against trans workers (ie firing you when you come out), not private citizens using the wrong pronoun. the criminal responsibility is for severe hate speech such as inciting to mass murder, again not for pronoun usage at all. it's normal legal protection that already applies to other minorities.

that anon's delusion was that his property will be confiscated from him when he refuses to say "xir" or whatever. there's nothing there to substantiate this delusion.

>>9529855
>"In other words, pronoun misuse may become actionable, though the Human Rights Tribunals and courts. And the remedies? Monetary damages, non-financial remedies (for example, ceasing the discriminatory practice or reinstatement to job) and public interest remedies (for example, changing hiring practices or developing non-discriminatory policies and procedures)."

Learn to read for Christ's sake.

>>9529860
>Non-discrimination on the basis of gender identity and expression may very well be interpreted by the courts in the future to include the right to be identified by a person’s self identified pronoun.

>>9529829
>an illegitimate simplification
>You can be left or right in your political views. But you can also be liberal or authoritarian.

are you seriously complaining about "illegitimate simplification" while you subscribe to this "political compass" faggotry you discovered on a website when you were 14? no wonder you have no idea what a "leftist" is, you treat politics like it's a dnd alignment. what's your meyers-briggs personality type? what's your horoscope? read a book nigga

>>9529869
Now you're just being facetious. If you're not even seeing the same text as I am, there's not point continuing this discussion.

>>9529873
I'm not who you were responding to initially. What I posted occurs at the beginning of the same paragraph you posted from, giving it context. Fines don't happen at the moment, but may happen in the future. It's not certain, but it seems like you are saying it is.

Also if you are concerned about 'contempt of court' here is the type of person found to be in contempt:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ross_Taylor
>was a Canadian fascist political activist and party leader prominent in white nationalist circles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomasz_Winnicki
> is a Polish-Canadian white supremacist

>>9529880
Fines based on misuse of pronouns I mean

>>9529860
all of that refers to employers, not private individuals. do you think if you misgender someone in a bar a court will order you to change your hiring practices?

like i would normally assume you were intentionally quoting shit out of context, but you actually kept the context that proves you wrong in the quote. can you even read?

>>9529880
Right, so it is possible for it to happen. That's all I am arguing.

And it shouldn't be possible.

>>9529887
And yet it does happen to private individuals in other contexts.

Is there an actual definition of "left wing" and "right wing"?

>>9529894
Are you against any anti-discrimination laws?

>>9529894
you used to argue for an actual thing that is actually happening but i guess at this point you're going to take "it's possible to imagine a state charging you money for pronoun misuse even if no such thing is really happening" as a victory

yes, it is possible for a feminist to castrate you.

>>9529900
No there's no actual definition of anything.

>>9529899
please say something specific for once in this thread. what happens to which individuals in what context and what do you think it means?

>>9529900
is there actually your mom

>>9529902
I don't think it should there should be laws against any speech apart from a threat of imminent physical violence.

>>9529912
Another guy literally posted it here>>9529880

Learn to pay attention.

>>9529904
>yes, it is possible for a feminist to castrate you.

It certainly is in Canada. With state-backing nonetheless.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Elliott

>>9529920
They are public figures not your average Johnny Canuck.

>>9529731
"Liberal" in the US took on its current meaning in the 1930s when FDR tied it to the developments of the New Deal, like his proposed Second Bill of Rights, unions, welfare programs, government spending, and the government generally actively working to address economic and social issues; in other words, positive liberties. This got extended particularly further in regards to social issues during the 1960s, with the Great Society and the civil rights movement, in which the government granted rights to citizens vis a vis other citizens, namely that their fellow citizens not discriminate against them, which was very controversial socially, legally, and otherwise because of the implicit power it bestowed upon the government to regulate what had traditionally been regarded as private and interpersonal. This in addition to the obvious Southern backlash to attempts to end racism.

In the US, if you take the Reaganite idea of "conservative", it is the desire to conserve the freedom of the individual against government power, for better or worse (so no welfare, because then you're dependent on the government), very much in keeping with Ayn Rand. The GOP, particularly the neocons, haven't really stuck to this. There's also the portion that seeks to conserve the traditional social and moral order.

"Two Concepts of Liberty", by the New Deal-style liberal Isaiah Berlin, explains this idea further.

>>9529920
and of course when you are forced to be specific it turns out you're full of shit. i'm just going to recap your points

>not saying xir leads to a fine in canada. this is literally happening
>where's the evidence
>this bill
>there's nothing in this bill about fining individuals, just reparations for discriminatory company policy
>but it will apply to individuals as well
>why
>because a neonazi went to prison once after advocating genocide

in other words, still zero evidence that any private individual has ever or will ever be fined for not saying "xir"

>>9529931
Thx a lot, anon.

>Right Wing/Fascist Literature Thread
>Liberals and Socialists having a purity contest
Every time.

>>9529952
>this is literally happening

I didn't say it was "literally happening". I said it would probably happen in the future, because now it is law.

Can anyone quote the section of this Canadian bill that makes misgendering a prosecutable crime?

I've been lied to too many times about "these laws that are totally coming guys!!1!"

I'd like some actual evidence from a reasonably non-partisan source.

>>9529970

This. There are like 5 people in this thread saying they've read the entire bill, so it shouldn't be that hard to copypaste?

>>9529952
>because a neonazi went to prison once after advocating genocide

He didn't go to prison for advocating genocide, he went to prison because he was held in contempt of court for refusing to pay fines, which is exactly what is going to happen in the future with Bill C-16.

>>9526589
(I'm assuming you're American based on how you talk about politics, and the sorts of people popping up in your stories, correct me if I'm wrong)

I'm gonna tackle one part of your post. I don't feel like going into all of it. Someone else can tackle others.


>I had an argument with a liberal about gay marriage. My position was: I don't care what 2 people do behind closed doors, but the moment you start asking for social and legal sanction for the relationship(aka a marriage), it no longer remains your personal issue.

This confuses me more than it does you.

As soon as you start asking that the abstract worldwide concept of "marriage" conform specifically to your own (debated) religious doctrines surrounding marriage, you are asking for Christian theocracy in a first world representative republic. Not just any Christianity either: A specific homophobic interpretation (which admittedly is more common of an interpretation). At that point you steadily start to become Saudi Arabia Lite.

Homophobia to me serves a secular purpose: Preserving the cutthroat masculinity in a society for military purposes. Femininity is inextricably tied to homosexuality. The association is memed into reality, and the reality of the meme feeds the meme further in a feedback loop.

This secular homophobia arises in situations where it is assumed of course that the identity and culture of the society is more important than humanity at large (this was the assumption for most of history). These assumptions are ratified in modern military strategy and corporate strategy which rely on only the most dominant and power-hungry approaches.

Beneath all this secular civic homophobia there needs to be a cultural justification to keep the meme fire going. Hence the secular civic incentives in some regards "select for" religious ideologies which are homophobic the same way an environment will "select for" phenotypes lending to survival. however I don't get why Christians of any ilk pick and choose what biblical values to enforce in modern times. Like, why do American Christians for instance care what Leviticus says about homosexuals more than what Leviticus says about shellfish? And why are parts of the Hebrew bible selectively packaged with the New Testament anyway? Even one of America's earliest presidents (Thomas Jefferson), you know, one of those champions of liberty from a better time (...) knew better than to take the old testament seriously. Yet here you have these modern duck dynasty protestants who cite old testament more often than new, and who elect atheist billionaires to the presidency even though a Jewish former carpenter was running during the primaries on the other ticket (you can't make this shit up).

>>9529986
Not him, but marriage has been a Christian concept for 2000 years in the West.

There's literally nothing left of it, if the Christian element is gone from it.

What exactly is the point of a ritual, if the ritual doesn't refer to anything that you personally deem sacred?

>>9529980
Fines issued because he was advocating genocide and continued to do so after issued the fines.

>>9526412
On a quick side note what's the best translation on The Sailor Who Fell From Grace With The Sea? Does translation affect the overall quality in this case? Are most translations you can find serviceable?

>>9529980
If you refuse to call someone xir there's not much that can be done about it because in court it's just he said xe said. Discriminatory practices and public figures are all on record.

>>9530008
>If you refuse to call someone xir there's not much that can be done about it because in court it's just he said xe said

I find it hard to believe a country that sentences people to fines and orders them not to use the internet for 2 years because they disagreed with feminists on the internet will care about "innocent until proven guilty".

>>9530010
>disagreed with

Euphemism? If you're making blog posts advocating genocide the proof is right there on your blog

>>9530019
I was talking about this case>>9529923

>>9530028
>On January 22, 2016, all charges against Elliott were dismissed.

Well Canada learned, didn't it. Is that what you're worried about? Someone won't be able to go on the internet for three years then the case will get dropped anyway setting precedent for care in these sorts of cases?

>>9530061
I'm actually more worried about people like you being flippant and condescending about state power being used for completely idiotic and insane purposes like policing Twitter.

>>9530066
I have more faith in the rationality of the court. And Twitter was only 'policed' because the feminist made a criminal case out of it (harassment) and more women came forward. No case, no issue. Trying to deal with sexual or violent threats isn't insane.

>>9530074
Except they were flat out lying and probably knew it too, and yet the court didn't censure them for filing a wrongful harassment claim, but instead they ordered him to stay off the internet for 3 years.

If you don't think that's a problem you're probably one of the people who thinks it's okay to use state power for your ideological bullshit.

>>9530088
>>9530066

This is weird, the one example you point to was totally overturned?

I'm not going to dismiss this as an issue but saying it's the most important consequence of the culture war when it was literally reversed?

In one breath people will complain about greedy Wall Street businessmen buying politicians but then in the next they'll support giving those politicians more power. Why does it never occur to them that if those politicians weren't as powerful there wouldn't be any reason to buy them? The common link between every authoritarian country on earth is the high amount of corruption.

>>9530088
They weren't lying, there was just no real legal grounds so it was reversed. It was certainly harassment, just not what the law considers egregious enough to fine or imprison. So no I don't see a problem with that.

Also no I'm not a fan of state power. I'm being impartial.

>>9530114
You're just trolling right now.

The court literally found no evidence of harassment at all, which means that they lied.

>It was certainly harassment

No it wasn't you faggot.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/
Umberto Eco Ur-Fascism

>>9530119
No evidence of criminal harassment.

>>9530131
So what you're saying is that it's legal to harass people in Canada?

I love when threads get bloated with arguments

>>9530142
Yes that's what I mean by saying there's such thing as 'criminal harassment', I clearly and unequivocally mean that there is no such thing as criminal harassment.

No wonder you don't understand this law stuff.

>>9530123
Interesting from a liberal point of analysis. But that has been overdone. Where is the overdue right-wing analysis or a self-critique of fascism?

>>9530145
I mean, you're really grasping at straws here.

If those feminists claimed he harassed them, and they find no evidence of such a thing, they are liars.

It's not rocket science.

>>9526750
We'll what'd'ya know?

>>9526771
That's actually a pretty good way to word that.

>>9530152
No, they may have just misunderstood just what the Crown means by 'criminal harassment'. There's no evidence that they lied, but if multiple women felt harassed by this dude the Crown thought it was in their interests to investigate.

Man what a world it would be if every time someone tried to convict someone else only to turn out with inadequate evidence they were then in turn convicted of 'criminal lying' or like 'endangerment'.

>>9527101
>Balzac
I'm not reading anything by someone with the name Balzac.

>>9530164
>There's no evidence that they lied

Apart from the fact that there is no evidence that he did what they claimed he did.

I mean, I don't get why you're defending them. They were clearly sociopaths looking to destroy someone's life.

>tfw you study both extreme far right and extreme left wing philosophy
>tfw you discover the perfect harmony implicit in their initial separation
>tfw milquetoast reform progressives and other neoliberal centrist letzte mensch sleepers can only churn their own bourgeois shit around them in funereal wakes for eternity
>tfw monistic left/right LARPers can't escape the gravity well of la masse because their spirit energies are lopsided
>tfw you will be the one to restore balance to the force
>tfw natur will rejoin with geist and all material and ideal forces will be seen as the grund and erscheinungsform of their counterpart
>tfw benjamin will achieve verschmelzung with hitler in kaballa valhalla
>tfw you will complete the aufhebung and win the video game
>tfw a marxo-hegelian ambidextrous shiva will jerk you off with all of its hands for eternity

>>9530175
I have never read Land but I want him to read like this.

>>9530174
>Apart from the fact that there is no evidence that he did what they claimed he did.

That is not evidence. Like I said, they could have not understood the Crown definition of harassment, the kind they would prosecute. He did 'harass' them in any everyday sense, but just not to the degree where he could be criminally prosecuted (even though he was, but it was reversed), that is putting someone in fear of their safety by sending sexual or violent messages. He's the sole case where someone was prosecuted without fulfilling those conditions but after 2 years of not using the computer they reversed it and now it's pretty clear that is not going to happen again.

Like I said, I'm being impartial. I'm explaining the result, not defending anyone. The defending has been done in a legal sense. I don't condone Twitter harassment or even trolling, in fact I quit the site a while ago because I think it's irredeemably bad.

>>9530220
>Like I said, they could have not understood the Crown definition of harassment

Or you know, they deliberately lied to get someone in trouble.

OP here.

So, the girl I mentioned in >>9526589, as it turns out, has a blog. She written just one post, and it is about gender and heteronormativity.

I would like to provide a point by point rebuttal of her essay, but it seems so... correct... that I don't know where to start. Here's the blogpost. Let her know what you think in the comments.

https://selfandtheotherblog.wordpress.com/2017/05/20/first-blog-post/

>inb4 NYPA

>>9529824
I'm a Dutchie and the points made by Wilders which can be considered 'far right' like the closing of all mosques, abolishment of headscarves etc. is far from the agenda pushed by Rutte. Yes, traditional parties incorporate some views from far right parties like restricting immigration, but the whole 'rightwing awakening' is a bunch of American bullshit. When there were elections here a few months ago the country was flooded by foreign journalists who ACTUALLY thought Wilders would win the elections. No Dutch person ever believed this. Wilders is not some kind of new kid on the block, he has been an established politician since at least 2004. His 20 seat total is not even his best result, in 2008 he received 21 seats.

My point is that the whole 'Western liberalism is on the decline' narrative was invented by disillusioned Anglo journalists who tried to make sense of their failure to see Trump/Brexit. This narrative is pushed by the big papers: NYT, The Guardian, WaPo etc. constantly. Alt right/Dark enlightenment kiddos happily jump on the bandwagon. The fact remains that the global neoliberal order is here to stay. It sucks yea, but we need to accept this.

>>9530237
They may have but there's no evidence to prosecute.

>>9530247
>Call police saying there's a shooting downtown
>Turns out to be false
>You won't be prosecuted though because there's no evidence that you lied

Please try it and see if it works.

>>9530258
The Crown prosecuted though so it's pretty clear harassment did occur. It's like if there was a shooting downtown but no property was damaged and there were no injuries. The shooters get away but you don't get prosecuted because the state couldn't bring a case home.

>>9530246
Dude, I've been saying this shit on 4chan since at least 2013.

>The fact remains that the global neoliberal order is here to stay. It sucks yea, but we need to accept this.
The global neoliberal order failed with Bush, you can see that plainly in Obama's foreign policy and the increased Russo-Chinese resistance to US interventionism. The economic aspect of this neoliberal order is principle of universal free trade and even on that front do we saw a rollback to protectionist policies. Go and read Huntington if you believe otherwise.

>>9530275
We're done tbqh. You're just trolling now. Perhaps you've been trolling for the last 3 hours.

Well played.

>>9526412
feels>reals


There you go, all of right wing literature

>>9530244
Honestly, she's stuck in defining, and even purposefully redefining terms to fit her schedule (homo sapiens, gay, etc. All have contexts of usage and she conflates every context in order to install confusion).

I know you asked for right wingers, but if you really want to get into these people's heads, you should go for Hegel, Hume and Deleuze. Deleuze specially is one of philosophers who endorsed the notion that we should deal with other people's minds by using their own standards to navigate their ideas, not ours. This is where therapists stop treating mental ilness as something in need of a cure, etc. And the root of much of contemporary social justice.

As for right wing thinking, you could try Land or Taleb for example, but if you're more of a traditionalist, Can't help you there. Thing is, traditional thinkers like Peterson are fighting a losing battle by insisting on an intellectual stand that left-leaning postmodernism refuses on principle.

>>9530244

No one has out-and-out said it yet so I thought I would.

Part of being a rational human being is following evidence as a butterfly follows the wind. If the only reason for your politics is a vague feeling, you shouldn't act to confirm that feeling but should explore all sides - a vague feeling is the weakest possible evidence.

To avoid confirmation bias, go take a mainstream political philosophy course, and read some far left books, at the same time as your reactionary stuff.

If you don't do this, then you're playing politics as a sport, and you should have zero self respect.

>>9530290
You're pretty dumb honestly.

The guy was prosecuted for harassment. How does that happen if harassment doesn't occur? The difference is it didn't fulfill normal conditions for 'criminal harassment' so it was reversed a couple of years later. The women weren't lying about harassment because the state ended up prosecuting the dude for the very fact that he was harassing women. Should the state prosecute itself for lying? Or just the women because you're some ideological stooge who is unhappy the state doesn't follow his own wishes?

>>9530321
He was prosecuted for harassment that DID NOT TAKE PLACE.

How the fuck is this hard to understand?

>>9526771
>says that fascism is less romantic than socialism
>posts the guy who created a country founded on music and poetry
ok

>>9530314
Leftists, especially of the postmodern variety do not care about evidence. Look at the gender question. There are clear scientific differences between the sexes and yet people go on to claim that women should be allowed into the military even though they are clearly weaker

They have discarded empiricism as a mode of thinking and are basing their ideology on philosophy. Look at Judith Butler's Gender Trouble for example. She makes tons of claims that have absolutely evidence, and then she claims that she doesn't need one because the process of evidence collection itself is sexist.

Plus, the right wing can't be absolutely incorrect, right? I mean I know there a ton of idiot conservatives that say stupid stuff about evolution and climate change but honestly, not every conservative position is "wrong", is it?

>>9530333
'Criminal harassment' didn't take place, but harassment did. The women weren't lying about the harassment, of which their understanding is different to that of the Crown. To them it did occur so they tried to prosecute. They shouldn't be prosecuted for not understanding the law, especially when the Crown agreed initially. If anything it was the prosecutor's fault for arguing the case.

There's like a whole other layer to this you're not quite getting.

>>9530349
>They do this!
>They do that!

Sign me up to your political party.

>>9530355
Why are are you differentiating between "criminal harassment" and harassment? Does the law differentiate between the two?

No it doesn't. Either you criminally harass someone, or you aren't harassing anyone.

Words have meanings for a reason.

>>9530369
>No it doesn't

Yes it does, hence the 'criminal'.

>>9530379
Look, either you did something illegal, or you didn't.

Saying he harassed someone when he wasn't doing anything illegal is wrong.

>>9526412
Evola, Oswald Mosley, Yockey, Mussolini, Codreanu, Alfred Rosenberg

>>9530388
There are common definitions of words and then there are legal definitions of words. There is calling someone an idiot constantly then there is intimidating someone with threats. There is negligence then there is criminal negligence.

>>9529609
>destroying western civilisation
>implying it didn't die after the christmas truce

>>9530402
But he wasn't calling anyone idiots constantly, he was disagreeing politically with feminists on the internet.

If they can't handle disagreement they should seek cognitive psychotherapy and not use state power as a projection of their fragile egos.

>>9526412
>winning the culture war
>through politics

Make some pepe art dumbo

>>9530413
>His harassment of her (and two other complainants, who haven’t testified yet) is alleged to have consisted of deluging her with unwanted Tweets, shadowing the events she organized, and keeping tabs on her movements by watching the hashtags she followed.

Get out of here you dull ideologue.

>>9529790
>The Russian government manipulated swing state voters by pushing pizzagate and other stories.
Literally /pol/ did this, not a russian government.
I'm 99% sure my twitter account has been flagged by the US Government as a russian bot account.

>>9530429
>is alleged

You're the ideologue faggot. You're the one who believes the statements of political harpies against a lone guy who disagreed with them.

>>9529904
Hypothetically, a law is passed saying you can't speed or you will be fined.
It hasn't happened yet because the law was just passed.
People start saying, well all you gotta do is not speed, so you won't be fined.
People say well you CAN be fined, it's written into legislation!
Nonsense, it hasn't happened therefore there is no concern of it happening
This is pretty much what I'm gathering from your posts.
This misgendering thing can certainly well happen, and just because it hasn't yet doesn't mean there is no rational concern for compelled speech laws.

>>9530444
Yes that's how cases go to court, when one party alleges the other did something. I don't believe the statements -- it doesn't matter if I do or not -- I'm just telling you how the Crown functions.

>While Knazan called Guthrie’s work to promote women’s rights “admirable” and Elliott’s words offensive, he noted there was no explicit threat of violence and much of the sense of harassment was based on a volume not context of tweets.

It's not that he just 'disagreed' you disingenuous faggot.

>Elliott peppered his tweets to Reilly “with mean, crass” comments, the judge noted. But again he cited the fact that Reilly, like Guthrie, had also continued to tweet negative things about Elliott. And he noted that the crown in either case wasn’t able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt there was a real threat of violence.

>Guthrie and Reilly had both blocked Elliott on the site — a move that prevents a user from viewing someone’s tweets when logged into the website — but they told police they felt he continued to track their movements and feared for their safety.

Do I have to keep explaining to you how the law works or do you finally get it?

>>9529980
and there is no law that fines you for not saying xir so you cannot be held in contempt of court for not paying fines for not saying xir. jeez

>>9530452
There is no law on misgendering.

>>9530457
>but they told police they felt he continued to track their movements

>they felt

Yeah, stellar evidence.

>>9530461
Yes there is.

>>9527101

>Conservatives would benefit from an understanding of Marx, who was a big fan of Balzac. Conservatives should also read more Rousseau, specifically his First Discourse and his Letter to D'Alembert. Thomas Carlyle, Henry Adams, and T.S. Eliot should also be read more by conservatives.

Apart from Balzac, all of these recommendations are absolutely fucking terrible.

Last Man stuff on steroids.

>>9530465
They still have to investigate, and that evidence is produced in court.

>Throughout the trial, Elliott’s lawyer, Chris Murphy, argued Elliott was simply disagreeing with Guthrie and Reilly and engaging in an ideological debate. The Crown had argued that the sheer number of tweets he sent about them, and the fact he continued to use hashtags they frequented, amounted to harassment. One tweet of Elliott’s about an event at a Toronto bar became a particular focus because it made Reilly feel he was tracking her movements in real life.

>Knazan said both women may have actually feared Elliott but said there was not enough proof he was either aware of their sentiments or had any potential to become violent to surpass the standard of reasonable doubt.

So this ideological shit you're pulling about the feminists are taking over the state or whatever is unfounded. There was a one-off case that was eventually reversed because the courts aren't idiots and know a thing or two about evidence and what constitutes harassment in a legal sense.

>>9529969
>I didn't say it was "literally happening".

yes you did:

>i described what's happening in some provinces of Canada. The type of scenario i described is real.

and now you changed it to

>I said it would probably happen in the future, because now it is law.

which is also untrue. there is no law in canada that would fine one individual for refusing to call another individual "xir"

you have backpedaled from a demonstrably false statement into another demonstrably false statement

>>9530471
post it please. it has not been posted itt.

>>9530480
>i described what's happening in some provinces of Canada. The type of scenario i described is real.

I never said this because you were talking to another guy.

>>9530452
the law you keep referring to does not exist.

>>9530476
>So this ideological shit you're pulling about the feminists are taking over the state or whatever is unfounded

It really isn't, but that's not related to this case per se.

I sincerely doubt you'll find a politician in Canada who says they are not a feminist. If so, that's probably the 2 Christian conservatives left in the country.

>>9530486
okay, so you've taken over for the other idiot and you've replaced his demonstrably false claim (that this pronoun law exists and has been used against people) with your own demonstrably false claim (that this pronoun law exists and might be used against people). maybe a third idiot will take over for you and downgrade the claim further (the pronoun law does not exist but might come into existence and then be used against people)

>>9530486
Then both of you should give it a rest, you're embarassing yourselves.

>>9530499
Well it does exist, and it probably will be used in the future.

Just because you can link to some article of a Gender studies whore professor at UofT saying it will never happen, doesn't mean it will you faggot.

>>9530495
Whether they're feminists or not has no bearing on their practice of the law. The law is the law, not the opinions of those who are lawyers.

>>9530509
Sucks to be that one person who gets prosecuted for an imaginary law only for it to be reversed two years later.

>>9530509
>Just because you can link to some article of a Gender studies whore professor at UofT saying it will never happen

What is up with /pol/ not being able to read? The article says it 'may' happen (the implication of which means the law doesn't actually exist). All those infographics have rotted your brain.

>>9530519
It's not an imaginary law you fucking faggot. The link you posted literally said it's plausible that someone can be prosecuted for failing to use someone's preferred pronoun.

>>9530349

The point I was trying to get across was that OP's method is objectively stupid if he cares about the truth. I don't give a shit about these randos you're talking about. Why did you bring them up?

It's really one of the most annoying tendancies of the right, this assumption that everyone who disagrees with them should have to answer for whatever's on Sargon's cringe compilations this week.

>>9530509
>Well it does exist

please post it then or stop talking.

please post the law that fines individuals for refusing to use another individual's chosen pronouns. i've been waiting this whole thread for this law to be posted.

you can't post it because it does not exist.

>>9530528
>http://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42-1/bill/C-16/third-reading

>"The purpose of this Act is to extend the laws in Canada to give effect, within the purview of matters coming within the legislative authority of Parliament, to the principle that all individuals should have an opportunity equal with other individuals to make for themselves the lives that they are able and wish to have and to have their needs accommodated, consistent with their duties and obligations as members of society, without being hindered in or prevented from doing so by discriminatory practices based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, disability or conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered."

>gender identity and gender expression

E.g someone's preferred pronoun.

>>9530523
Yes it is. It even says in the link that it's not about pronoun misuse. Did you only get as far as 'http://sds.utoronto.ca' before you had an opinion on the article?

>So what does this mean for pronoun misuse? Well, refusing to use a person’s self identified pronoun is not going to be considered advocating genocide – unless the refusal to use the pronouns was accompanied by actually advocating genocide against trans and gender non-binary folks.

>Similarly, it’s hard to see the refusal to use the appropriate pronoun –without something else – rising to the threshold of hate speech.

Here's the 'bias' from the article:

>Personally, I am not a big fan of hate speech laws. I worry that prosecutions under hate speech laws end up bringing more rather than less attention to the offending speech, and more often than not, turns the offensive speaker into a martyr.

>>9530534
>discriminatory practices based on ... gender identity or expression

How is pronoun misuse a 'discriminatory practice'?

In 2017, does "left wing" basically mean "wants more multiculturalism", while "right wing" means they do not? Because that's what it feels like now.

>>9530523
no it literally does not

>This will prevent the federal government and businesses within federal jurisdiction – like banks – from discriminating on the basis of gender identity and gender expression.

>Non-discrimination on the basis of gender identity and expression may very well be interpreted by the courts in the future to include the right to be identified by a person’s self identified pronoun.

this refers to the policies of companies. this does not refer to an individual calling another individual the wrong pronoun.

how the fuck do you still fail to understand a simple article even after it has been explained to you multiple times.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND BUSINESSES WITHIN FEDERAL JURISDICTION

ARE YOU A GOVERNMENT OR A BUSINESS YOU THICK FUCK

>>9530546
Left wing wants a full, balanced, nutritious meal, right wing wants tendies.

>>9529773
>everybody in this thread is a pathetic beta SJW cuck who will get raped by refugees also they defend tranny feminists

>heh, have no arguments against me? Pathetic.

>>9530534
see
>>9530549

you are not a buisness. you cannot have discriminatory practices.

>>9530549
>this refers to the policies of companies

No it doesn't. Stop using that red herring.

>>9530557
yes it does.

>>9530549
>YOU THICK FUCK
No need to get upset friend.
There's obviously two ways to interpret this law.
If there wasn't, how come Peterson is making such headlines if he was completely wrong? How come he's going into senate hearings with a lawyer trying to oppose bill c16, are you saying they're both wrong?
No, this is not the case. They've chosen to analyze this bill with other branching legislation and they've come to the conclusion among others that this bill is compelled speech.

>>9530554
>you are not a buisness. you cannot have discriminatory practices.

Neither did these guys>>9529880

>>9530546
left -> freedom for all
right -> slavery for most

>>9530557
You may want to double-check what a discriminatory practice is.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/h-6/page-1.html#h-5

>>9530544
It's simple though. The law protects against discrimination based on gender expression, which essentially means that criticizing people's fashion choices automatically constitutes discrimination.

And furthermore, it protects gender identity, and what is gender identity? It's literally the subjective feelings of teenage snowflakes, and this includes pronoun usage.

>>9530563
They got done for public notice discrimination probably. Everything else is business-based.

Also this is about federal jurisdiction. Like the article says this bill is playing catch-up to what already exists on a local level.

>>9530585
>which essentially means that criticizing people's fashion choices automatically constitutes discrimination.

Not in the legal sense of discrimination, no.

>>9526412
Mein Kampf

>>9530591
So what happens if you're a professor of psychology at UofT and you do the same thing?

>>9530596
Read it, its a retarded book. Mostly incoherent ramblings. reading /pol/ posts would be a better use of my time

>>9530591
Look up what Ontario Human Rights Code defines as gender expression

>>9530600
If you misuse a pronoun you are forced to undergo sexual reassignment surgery. Say hello to Jordana.

>>9530611
Answer the question sperglord.

>>9530610
>On June 19, 2012, two new grounds were added to the Code, “gender identity” and “gender expression”. There is overlap between the two grounds and their precise meaning is still being explored.

More relevant is this:

Protected social areas are:
Accommodation (housing)
Contracts
Employment
Goods, services and facilities
Membership in unions, trade or professional associations.

>>9530621
That's literally what the law says. Check for yourself.

>>9530621
Don't worry man you can't be discriminated against for being single either.

>>9530622
So is it still legal to discriminate privately then?

Lets say I'm a student at a university and refuse to use someone's pronoun. Can I get in trouble?

>being right-wing
Sincerely kill yourself. The today's battle is between liberalism and socialism, fascist kids like yourself are laughable distractions to the global capitalist world order. You offer no perspective for the population, just immaturity, prejudice and stupid spooks.
It's incredible how you can't even comprehend the self-contradiction in your views - advocating "le ethnic national purity" while supporting third world exploitation of industry which creates the immigrant masses flocking to the rich West in the first place. Your whole worldview is a kneejerk, fantasy response to economic problems. Read a fucking book.

>>9530653

What actually is a spook? I see the meme every day but can't find definitions that concur.

>>9530646
>Can I get in trouble?

It doesn't look like it from what I've seen. Discrimination is about preventing people from doing the same things as the 'general population'. There may be grounds for discrimination if you're a professor and you ridicule someone in front of the class for wanting a certain pronoun to be used but I'm not Canadian or a lawyer so I don't know how 'public notice' applies.

>>9530606
I haven't read it, but an old friend of mine says the same thing. He offered to buy me a copy but he has two already and i don't really want to waste my time

>>9530653
Dude your whole entire post is a fucking strawman.
You just saw right wing and now you're lighting it on fire.
Being right wing or a fascist is NOT the same as being a nazi or ethnic nationalist.

>>9530472
What do you suggest that is better? Besides Nietzsche apparently.

>>9530557
You are wrong about this, m8.

>>9529994
>Not him, but marriage has been a Christian concept for 2000 years in the West.

Wrong... You forget any of the early pagan conceptions of marriage that have occurred in the past 2000 years, as well as, forgetting any other minority religions concept of marriage in the west (ex: jews).


>There's literally nothing left of it, if the Christian element is gone from it.

You know you can get married in a christian church right? Its not like their forcing you to only get married in some secular government ceremony.

>What exactly is the point of a ritual, if the ritual doesn't refer to anything that you personally deem sacred?

Marriage can still be viewed as sacred. Just because gays can get married by state officials or any heathen christian preacher who's willing to perform the ceremony doesn't render the christian sacrament not sacred.

>>9530730
>Marriage can still be viewed as sacred.

What makes it sacred?

>>9530670
In this case, spooks are identity politics such as nationality, ethnic purity, tradition etc. They are imaginary identities which obscure the real, material inequality and class-based divisions as the basis of social conflict.
It is essential to right-wing ideology to construct outside forces which interfere with the "organic", "natural", "self-regulating" system, which only needs to expel the Other to return to its perfect, stable condition. These strategies can obviously work very well and appeal to the lower passions, since admitting that social conflict is caused by structural, immanent, material forces in the relations of production, instead of external threats by the Other, is a difficult and lengthy process of attacking bourgeois ideology.

>>9530751
Othering is a quintessential component of democratic politics. Without the Other, there can be no democratic sovereign. Read Schmitt: The Concept of the Political.

>>9530747
It could be sacred to the community, it could be sacred to the specific religious community, it could be sacred to the person. It can still be viewed as sacred to specific people, yet be viewed as not sacred by others.

>>9530751

>In this case, spooks are identity politics such as nationality, ethnic purity, tradition etc.

Muh spooks.

>They are imaginary identities which obscure the real, material inequality and class-based divisions as the basis of social conflict.

Your article of faith is that material inequality, class-based divisions and social conflict are bad things.

>>9530791
This memey relativism would only apply if the State had nothing to do with marriage.

But it does.

>>9530823
How?

The State only relates to marriage, because of its ability to regulate it. It doesn't have any actual authority to decide what it means, but it can change how its practiced; perhaps that change in how its practiced in turn changes the meaning. The only reason the State expanded marriage writes was not for the change in the definition of marriage, but for political reasons.

>>9530845
rights*

I'm not even saying that memey relativism is correct, but you cant deny that some people view marriage as sacred while others deny it.

Whether its actually sacred is a different discussion. I'm just talking about how its perceived not how it actually is

>>9530845
You but you also get privileges for getting married, like tax cuts.

>>9529855
There's nothing wrong with firing someone for being a degenerate.

Good literature thread

>>9529616
mlk was an actual nigger
not a white coffee shop dweller

>>9529714
then maybe you should realize you have no validity to demanding legislation if you have no conceivable legal definitions for this "group" that pretty much is the exception to the rule