/lit/ - Literature

>>9575630
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/philosophy/nick-land-the-alt-writer

Yes.

>>9575633
The one on the right disgusts me desu.

>>9575633
Un-fucking-believable how ugly abo women are. I can't wrap my head around it.

>>9575633
>cherrypicking
whoa, you sure proved something

>>9575630
I've always looked at the question the other way around. How would I ever prove that someone is better than someone else?

Within Nick Land's (current) thinking, I don't see how he can even champion IQ as a worthwhile trait, given that it is presumably our higher IQs which are inventing the means for the next great extinction, if not all out nuclear annihilation.

>>9575630
What definition do you have of "equal"

Do you mean morally equal? Or physically literally the same? I don't think very many claim the latter.

>>9575693
High IQ also predicts lower levels of happiness, higher rates of depression and a lot of other mental defections such as schizophrenia and autism. It also doesnt factor in literally any other desirable trait for people such as attractiveness, physical strength, overall health, moral virtue or literally anything about personality aside from a skewed preference towards neuroticism which is a bad thing.

People are extremely unequal sure, but you cant objectively measure "how good/valuable" someone is because there is no objective benchmarks. Which is why you are forced to treat people equally even if they may not live up to certain expectations.

Egalitarianism isnt a pipe dream, its the only option that wouldnt result in a massive authoritarian clusterfuck.

>>9575719
What good is high IQ if high IQ people refuse to have children? Nature couldn't give a shit about the accomplishments of high IQ people.

>>9575719
try the redpill. Some people are inherently superior to others (both in races and sex)

>>9575630
We are equal in the sense that we are all faulty, consuming entities, that are completely self-centred on a dying planet.


But we are unequal in terms of intelligence, competency and social use. There's too many people these days, doing nothing of use.

>>9575704
I didn't think so either until i was just asking my friends some questions and found out they believe women and men have no biological differences

>>9575630
We are brothers in Christ, of course we're equal. Every godless edge lord should have their throat slit

>>9575729
What's useful? Useful to whom?

>inb4 spooooooooks

>>9575693
>How would I ever prove that someone is better than someone else?
literally any metric

>>9575630
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

>>9575744
alright, I hereby decree that whoever shitposts the most on /lit/ is the best human.

I won't transcribe all of it, so listen between 39:00 & 45:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAT14h5_lMo&t=2972s

>>9575745
This pov is a good example of how the universalist religion of Christianity was buttering whites up for the universalist religion of multicultural liberalism. Both are jewish societal/ideological cancer.

>>9575728
I dont even disagree with that. Sure some people will be better than others, i come from a shit hole family so i know that there are objectively bad people that are worth very little. My issue is simply that any attempts to measure for superiority are massively inadequate and would result in horrendous suffering and mass injustice. Do you measure by IQ (IQ doesnt even 100% cover intelligence as we understand it)? By personality type? Artistry/Creativity? Criminal record? Try to measure how hard working they are? Do you screen people for unconscious bias against groups of people? Or do you do a combination of these. Then after all this, what would you even do with the results? Bad people made sterile or killed?

The practicality of this type of discrimination anti egalitarians propose is just completely impossible not to mention morally bankrupt.

>>9575630
has anyone watched the documentary that that Land pic is from? it's actually a pretty fascinating look at how the internet was perceived in the early 90's. it's titled Visions of Heaven and Hell.

>>9575756
>objectively
>bad

Kill yourself

>>9575756
Do you know what a bell curve is? If you stop viewing it in terms of individual outliers but in terms group means, you'll have a better understanding of humanity, and why the groups that comprise it are fundamentally unequal.

>>9575767
"le objectivity/evil doesnt exist meme"

Cute. I was an edgy teen once as well.

>>9575760
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwt-Jrmd5Ns&t=3900s

The part about Singapore is Land's wet dream, exactly how he envisions the perfect society - cold and efficient, like a machine.

>>9575773
What makes something evil?

>>9575681
>one on the left is largely white
Alt righters are dumb, leftists are literal potatos

>>9575770
Ok so you identified a "lagging group" with your bell curve well done you can read a graph that says african americans mean out at around 10 IQ points less than others. What is your plan to do with that information?

This is an honest question because you memers either say nothing or go full retard so i'll wait.

>>9575755
t. Pagan dork

Cancer.

>>9575783
We need to rid our white lands of superiority of these inferiors.

>>9575755
>t. will burn in Hell for all eternity

>>9575741
To society, to better society, rather than drain from it like thankless vampires.

>>9575783
I didn't mention any particular group and don't think the person I was responding to (you, I assume) did either. Perhaps you would like to take a deep breath and rephrase your question using proper punctuation this time?

>>9575780
Im not gonna lecture a sheltered kid who thinks mommy forgetting his tendies is suffering of the ego. Literally go read a book or go outside and get some perspective on human depravity.

>>9575791
Can we rid the land of inferior whites too?

>>9575630
OP you doomed this thread with a topic like that. Next time do something more obtuse.

>>9575756
Ironically, SJWs are trying to prove that with muh privileges.

>>9575630
I've always liked Negative Egalitarianism. That everyone is equally guilty and should be equally punished. No one gets rights, no one gets pleasure, no one survives.

>>9575791
>unironic white supremacy
SORT

Define equal.

I mean clearly, people have different physical and mental capabilities. People have different strengths and weaknesses. And depending on their genetics people have proclivities to different things.

But equal in terms of having to follow the law? Sure.

>>9575630
Why are people so obsessed with Nick Land?

Is it because they like the idea of fringe esoteric right-wing literature?

>>9575852
Yeah this is a key point in the discussion over equality. A lot of it is based on equivocation fallacy, ironically that all definitions of 'equality' are equal.

>>9575882
Usually what's actually being asked is "Are group differences between races, genders, and the like biological or environmental (and how can I use this as a justification for my favorite ideology?)"

>>9575791
>ethnic cleansing is a morally acceptable solution

kys

>>9575730
Where do they think babies come from?

>>9575835
>Mises Institute

>>9575892

What if there ARE group differences due to biology? I mean, there almost surely are. But that doesn't mean they have to be treated differently among the law.

>>9575904
There obviously are, but many people simply want to use this fact as a justification for mass killings, backwards governing systems, or other stupid shit.

>>9575756
Just get rid of niggers and you get rid of 50% of homocides. Get rid of Muslims and you get rid of terrorist attacks. That's the type of anti-egalitarianism that works.

>>9575904
It does though. Women have no reason to be in the army, for example. Nigs (except for certain exceptional cases) don't belong in science, etc.

>>9575878
He is the most interesting philosopher right now besides Zizek. The fact that he lives in exile from the authorities like a true philosopher would instead of being some vacuous superstar speaks to the authenticity of his ideas, too.

>>9575931
Give me the rundown my man.

What does Mr Land stand for?

>>9575903
yeah they have become shit but rothbard is worth reading regardless

>>9575944
I don't get why people don't just read mainstream economists. I know the math is hard, but people constantly doing textual exegesis from Von Mises or Marx seems like a colossal waste of time.

>>9575904
we currently don't do this see affirmative action we give others preferentiall treatment in employment

>>9575922
So you're proposing a law that would ban "most nigs" from "science"

>>9575940
basically
http://jacobitemag.com/2017/05/25/a-quick-and-dirty-introduction-to-accelerationism/
(You ought to have ublocker installed in your browser already!)
Accelerationism. It basically turns Marx on its head, treats Capital as a new kind of being that is already becoming increasingly more intelligent and aware, and is destined to transcend mere humanity like a butterfly sheds the carcass of a caterpillar.

Also, he is the theogonist of the Gnon, the god of capitalism, war, evolution and memetics.

>>9575968
The exact legal terminology.

>>9575976
>that is already becoming increasingly more intelligent and aware, and is destined to transcend mere humanity like a butterfly sheds the carcass of a caterpillar.
Is there any actual reason to think that's the case, apart from "sounding all cool and cyberpunk"?

I had a dream where Nick Land was my uncle, anyone else had a similar experience?

>>9575983
This is a pointless law. Only the right tail of the IQ distribution will go into serious sciences. Excluding blacks from science will cause social unrest due to blatant racism, waste human capital, and displease many scientists. And all for what, just to satisfy people who are angry about blacks? lel

Another question is how we do we act rightly on human differences.
Imagine there's a burning building with your brother and a stranger trapped inside. You can only rescue one.
Is it right to prefer rescuing your family member while refusing rescue the stranger?

I would argue it's not necessarily "morally right" whatever that means, but it is actually "evolutionary right" to favor your family. Given two men from different tribes, one egalitarian and one nepotist, the person (or people group) who favors his family has an evolutionary advantage. The one who "wins" (passes on genes) more often than not is the one who favors his own family. The egalitarian coin-flipper may have been a nice player in the short term, but in doing so, more often than not, he's ensured there are fewer nice players next generation.

Moreover, is it right to use violence (or threats of violence) to make someone to flip a coin when deciding which one to help?

>>9575630
Egalitarianism isn't the idea that all people are literally equal in all or most aspects. Do some basic research. Land's leprechaun tangent gets taken out of context by alt-right retards who are nowhere near the background required to understand his ramblings. His actual argument against it is far more complex.

>>9575931
>True philosopher

>>9575999
>how we do we act rightly on human differences.
Racial separation. Instead of one group having to deal with the refuse of another group, or being morally shamed because group X isn't performing equally, etc., we simply return to how it has always been, where each group takes care of and deals with its own.

>>9575990
Isn't the assertion that manual labor can't compete with automation regardless of whatever's done a kind of hint that capitalism has escaped from our control?

Yes we are all equal

Dark Enlightenment is the product of lolbertarian trust fund babbies and tech boom hustlers mad that Obama won

>>9576046

and how do you propose we seperate the groups? What if I am perfectly happy with black or asian neighbors? What if race isnt the defining charactaristic of my identity?

>>9575992
i had a dream that i was married to gilles deleuze, he basically slept most of the time

things seemed to be pretty cozy though

>>9576065
If you prefer living among Africans and Asians, feel free to go live among them in their countries, give them some diversity. What are you some kind of fascist who wants to force diversity on everyone else?

>>9576060
this

we're on a one-way ticket to the automatic planet

>>9576065
Just knock down idiotic anti-discrimination laws and the rest will sort itself out.

>>9576063
Obama was the beginning of anti-establishment politics in Washington embodied in the presidency - the whirlwind that we're caught in began when he smashed a true establishment led by Hillary back in 2008. Coincidentally, that was also the time that the news media comnpletely started dropping all pretense of objectivity.

http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2009/01/wrong_about_obama.html

https://thefifthwave.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/president-obama-and-the-joy-of-negation/

>>9576082

Don't assume I want to impose anything; you're the one holding a position that we can correct societal problems by separating races. I'm pointing out that such a system implies both a reduction of identity to race, and that it would actually fix anything at all.

A separation of races just strikes me as unnecessary, and beyond that, motivated from a position of always seeing the societal other by their race first.

>>9576063
It's not even "trust fund babbies", they're pretty much all funded by Peter Thiel to some extent. (You know, the vampire.)

>>9576046
Where do you stop separating the groups? Let's say we rid America of all non-whites, can we also get rid of Idahoans while we're at it since the state has the lowest average IQ in the country? What's the exact criteria for defining each group?

>>9575630

The real question is "is racial identity an innate part of human beings?" If it is, the concept of equality doesn't really matter, if people identify more strongly with people like themselves, this is where society will end up.

>>9576111
Even if, for the sake of argument, we assume it were "necessary" on paper, trying to actually implement it irl would cause more problems than it could ever hope to solve.

>>9576089

I've got no problem with anti-discrimination laws, but if you're positing a position of racial separation with no legal enforcement of that, you'd just wind up with what we have now, which is freedom of choice in where you reside. I think that's fine, but wouldn't that make the idea of racial separation irrelevant?

As a side point, I have no issue with maintaining culture or voluntarily separating race in a pluralistic society, but I think if you're at the point where you identify with being 'white' more than, say, 'anglo' or 'germanic' or even some particular regional version of American, you don't have that much culture left, or you're examining your way of life in a deeply reductionist lens.

Also your point on the media losing objectivity starting in 2008 is a bit off. We've had papers call for the impeachment of former presidents, and we've had newspaper magnates manufacture wars.

>>9575693

NIck does not (mostly) care whether or not any particular individual is better as an individual regarding any particular metric. Think in terms of aggregation and not individuation; In a swarm there are obviously larger and smaller animals, but they're all animals and it's the swarm effect which causes the greatest change. I suppose this is why Shanghai was such a wet dream for him, it's literally "anti-egalitarian cyberpunk with everyone acting as little cogs in the right places: electric bogaloo II".

>>9576122

We're in agreement

not this guy but landfags enjoy this. it's all about reactionary capitalism

>Everything that is not capitalism will be destroyed by capitalism.

>It is useless to resist. Fascists and communists alike have had their asses kicked. Progressives and reactionaries will have their asses kicked in the future. Humanities only salvation is to merge with the machine. We must be incorporated into it. Refuse and die.

>The market is a natural selection machine that acts on the bodies of corporations. Like sex and asexual reproduction before it, it is a filtration machine for producing more effective machines. Wherein conventional life uses three processes for evolution; reproduction, mutation, and death, capitalism uses three processes for development; entrepreneurial spirit, technological development, and bankruptcy. The corporation is an organism made of humans like the body is made of cells.

>Market formalism encodes reactionary values into capitalism by creating new property rights, (Property rights are possessive moral values enforced by state violence). The overwhelming force of globalism is little more than the selection pressure of its forms of property rights. The kinds of things that are defined as property rights dictate the embodied moral values of the system. There are capitalism(s) — plural, and what we have today can be called either parasitical capitalism, democratic capitalism, or maybe even autogenocidal capitalism. In contrast, what is proposed here is reactionary capitalism, or family capitalism. This is not a socialism or fascism, but a society based on a set of newly invented property rights. Since these new rights define new material values for a culture, they produce a new ecology/market for corporations to evolve under. They alter the environment and its selection effects, creating various evolutionary pressures for capitalism to evolve in a different direction. And they impose a new set of moral values which then seep into the mentality of the state. This is important because a set of property values that is at odds with a reactionary state will corrupt its morals and convert the state into a globalist regime.

http://theanti-puritan.blogspot.ca

>>9576134

Also, to add to this post, Nick is a hard fatalist regarding our own species: if you claim a metric being too high is going to cause or extinction, that's the one Nick will call "very good".

>>9575791

Statements like these lack any real moral or practical substance, and what little meme energy they had has scattered to the winds

>>9576134
This. I remember he tweeted something a few weeks ago about the alt-right's obsession with demographics being pointless since the human species as a whole was obsolete. He's more Ligotti-esque pessimism than anything.

>>9576111
But you're only seeing what you want to see. Racial identity is very important and is the foundation of identity itself. People also have instinctual, built-in mechanisms that make it impossible to carry on with the naive viewpoint you hold, which assumes everyone can and should just get along, and if they can't they're just racists etc. This is how societies are organized, and how they will always structure and sort themselves naturally, which is why there has never been a multicultural nation that stood for very long and never will be. The US is already starting to fall apart as the white majority continues to be overrun, and it is fracturing along racial lines through politics because, again, that's natural. The only thing holding it together are vague abstract notions of post-WW2 liberal values that of course will not last forever. I know you want to tell yourself that diversity is great and that it's going to work out, but this viewpoint is simply unrealistic. If you're white, you should reexamine these ideas because they are not in your own long term interest; if you're not white, I can definitely understand why it would be in your interest to want to believe.

>>9576132
> if you're positing a position of racial separation with no legal enforcement of that, you'd just wind up with what we have now, which is freedom of choice in where you reside.
Revoking anti-discrimination laws means that healthy communities would no longer be illegal, and money wouldn't be the only filter of where you could live.

>>9576151
Truth to be told, I think that the US and EU issue isn't so much immigration as stupid immigration - not only are minorities being allowed in far faster than the current society could assimilate them, the current society either tacitly or actively supports these minorities over the native population.

>>9576151

I'm going to make a good faith effort to address each of your points and deconstruct your argument.

>>9576116
Uh, it's extremely unlikely that Idaho has the lowest IQ in the nation. It probably has one of the highest since it has one of the highest percentages of whites.

You simply separate people on racial lines. I don't know what you're saying though, about where it would stop. It would stop when the groups are separated. It's pretty straight forward.

>>9576151
Had never existed =/= can never exist

>>9576163
So, having no idea what the actual figures are, you just assert that it's "unlikely" based on nothing but your personal belief that white = intelligent.

>>9576157
The vast majority of Africans and Arabs are incapable of assimilating, nor should Europeans want them to assimilate. The point is to safeguard the genetic and cultural heritage of your people. That's not going to happen if Europeans slowly (or quickly) turn into brown people.

>>9576168
Has never existed because diversity + proximity = war. You want to believe so bad, don't you?

Humans are not equal at all and its something I've had to come to the realization with at a later age

>>9576171
Do you know how IQ and bell curves work?

>>9576174
What's your working definition of "the genetic and cultural heritage of your people"? How would it be damaged by becoming more "brown"?

See >>9573520

>>9576189
It's simple biology: the genotypic and phenotypic diversity of Europeans is the greatest on earth, which is why Europeans are the only people with a spectrum of light hair and eyes. That will no longer exist if Europeans become brown people. Culturally Europeans are also responsible for the vast majority of scientific and technological achievements, upwards of 98%. Those high achieving abilities will falter if Europeans become brown people. See pic related.

>>9576181
No, attempting to forcibly separate all ethic groups from each other will "= war", more quickly than whatever nebulous rubbish you think is going to happen from their doing so. It's ludicrous to think that could be a practical possiblity.

No one is equal. People aren't even equal before law. People with previous records, and men get harsher sentences than first time offenders and women. And we aren't equal before God, Otherwise there would be no judgement?

Equality is a pretty bad meme in my mind

>>9576215
No, it's not. The vast majority of these people have arrived in the last 50 years since the 1965 immigration act, and mainly in the last 20 or so years. They can leave in just as much time or less. Claiming something to be impossible that clearly isn't is not an argument. "Oh well they're here now so they have to be here forever." Please...

>>9576226
>They can leave in just as much time or less
By what means? Who's going to pay for it? What happens when they decide they'd rather not? There's no answer to these questions that doesn't involve a lot more chaos, immediately, than their prescence will allegedly cause at some vague future point. Which is why this ideology is only found on the furthest backwaters of the internet; people with a knowledge of the actual material conditions know better.

>>9576151
>>9576161

As I understand your position, and your argument against mine:

>Racial Identity is the foundation of identity writ large.
>Racial identity informs other aspects of identity, which are derivative and reliant upon race.
>The above positions are supported by the lack of continued existence of multicultural nations, and their fracturing along racial lines

You also include an implicit assumption

>The racial interest exists separate from, and supersedes the intellectual and personal interest.


You made several other assumptions about my position, which are entirely wrong, but that's to be expected when we all spend 99 percent of our time shitposting.
Onto my counterpoint. I disagree - strongly - that race can exist as a defining characteristic of an identity, or that it informs other aspects of our identity in such a dominant way. Everything below will be in support of that position.
Consider that, if your position were true, you would expect to feel greater kinship with other whites regardless of other aspects of their identity. I am going to assume that you're an American for this example. Do you really think you'd find a greater sense of cultural unity with a Dane, a German, or a Frenchman, simply because they share your race? This seems observably false. Let's say that we disregard the language barrier - which I don't feel that I need to for my example. Do you think you'd seamlessly integrate into any of these societies without any degree of cultural confusion?

By all means I'll grant you that they're closer in culture than, say, African, middle-eastern, or Asian countries. Race does exist, and it is part of the loose grouping of the nations I listed above. However, the people who share your values, speak your language with your dialect, and have an intimate understanding of your way of life come (if you are from the united states) from several races. The predominant race being white - but even within the umbrella of white we find other divisions along the lines of catholic or protestant, Mormon or atheist. Outside of the white race, we would find blacks, hispanics, asians, and arabs who share several of our cultural touchstones.

(1/2)

>>9576244

2/2

Consider a real example of an identity forming moment for a US citizen - 9/11. Something along those lines creates the real fabric of unity within a nation, which is shared cultural norms and experiences. A black person born and raised in the united states would be more likely to understand your experience of this forming moment than a white person living in, say, Sweden. They would be more likely to understand the superbowl, to know the same movies and films you've seen, to use the same metaphors and eat the same food. Such minutia are the real basis for cultural unity.
We fall back on race to explain culture when we either lack a clear picture of our own, or reduce it to politically mobilizing caricatures. I recommend reading Sorel's 'Reflections on Violence' if you're interested in a good work discussing construction of identity. Heidegger and Arendt are even better, but they require a larger investment in time.

As for your supporting point of the lack of durability of multicultural nations - this is flatly wrong. Completely wrong. Just obviously wrong. The two oldest continuing governments are those of the United States and the United Kingdom, each composed of a myriad of ethnicities. The ever persistent successor states to Alexander in the east were generated by a Greco-Persian fusion. The perfidious ottoman and Austro-Hungarian empires sustained themselves for hundreds of years without collapsing. Geography, geopolitics, and domestic and international policy rather than ethic composition determine the long-form stability of the state. Those factors are why our government is well over 200 years old, while France is onto their fifth republic since deposing the monarchy.

It just seems unreflective of my own examined life, and of the history of states, to claim that race is equivalent to identity, or that it deserves such a commanding presence in history. It seems more plausible that it is a mobilizing reduction of culture into a form for the purposes of political mobilization.

On a final note, I don't wish to characterize anyone as a racist if they hold race as a prominent part of identity. I just think they're examining culture with a brutally reductive lens.

>>9576206

>Diversity is what makes the whites the best
>That's why they shouldn't interbreed

So did like Japan, South Korea and China change their genes to industrialize or something? Really makes you think.

>>9575976
good article

there's no ads on this site though

>>9576239
The majority of these people have no skills and come to white nations for handouts and to leech off first world systems. Cutting them off and removing them would save money in the long run. White people sitting back and being willing tax slaves for the endless third world hordes streaming into their countries, rent seeking off their institutions, and lowering the living standards in their communities will not last forever. In what world do you think it would? Certainly not a just one. Don't make my position out to be the immoral one here, what you want is far more unjust, you just haven't thought these things through yet.

>>9576261
What?

Read this new article by Land and take the fucking redpill

http://jacobitemag.com/2017/05/25/a-quick-and-dirty-introduction-to-accelerationism/

>>9576273

And do you support helping poor whites? What about nonwhites in your nation who are citizens and have been there for generations?

>>9576280
It's already been posted, retard.

>>9576277

From that chart you posted, we should be able to extrapolate that nonwhites will continue to not produce anything, if you really believe that source.

>>9576244
>The above positions are supported by the lack of continued existence of multicultural nations, and their fracturing along racial lines

>You also include an implicit assumption

>The racial interest exists separate from, and supersedes the intellectual and personal interest.

What is all this?

If you want me to read and reply to what you say, don't start off by telling me I said things I didn't say.

Just respond to what I said. Okay?

>>9576063
no read a book for once

>>9576286
woman/minority detected

>>9576273
Justice has nothing to do with it, it's just absurdly grandiose with no hope of coming to fruition. You keep banging on about "removing them" as if it's a matter of pressing a button, but these are people with lives, jobs, families - in many cases significant economic and political power. Only a lunatic fringe would endorse the idea of getting rid of them wholesale in the first place, the opposition to such a move would be crushing, it would cause conflict (probably actual warfare) with wherever you tried to move them TO, you'd then have to replace their labor and GDP with SOMETHING... and so on. Nonsense.