/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.12102075]

This little cuckboy fucked up all of western thought. Locke hate thread.

[Anonymous No.12102083]

Elaborate

[Anonymous No.12102097]

>>12102083
"haha lets make governments weak and let people do whatever they want, the tragedy of the commons dont real nigga"

I swear to god, how do you even come up with this gay shit.

[Anonymous No.12102205]

>>12102097
the tragedy of the commons is only increased by government.

You don't think big corps get big because they have a genuinely superior product right?

[Anonymous No.12102211]

>>12102205
They do, 95% of the time.

[Anonymous No.12102248]

lemme hide this thread before it gets any more insufferable

[Anonymous No.12102258]

[Anonymous No.12102291]

>>12102211
thats why apple is still a massive company even though they just steal other ideas and make products that are intended to break in a year. because of muh sooperior prahducts

[Anonymous No.12102299]

>>12102205
no, this is just indicative of a weak and effeminate government.

[Anonymous No.12102319]

Not based and bluepilled

[Anonymous No.12102334]

True liberalism for the win. Kill commies, kill rightists.

[Anonymous No.12102389]

>>12102075
That's not Karl Marx.

[Anonymous No.12102411]

>>12102291
Packaging is the product anon

[Anonymous No.12102442]

>>12102411
oh well in that case apple is genuinely the best company on the planet. ayn rand is right

[Anonymous No.12102487]

Listen up you stupid fucking idiot dumbass blowhard /pol/tard dumb faggot, your knowledge of western thought is so simplistic and unrefined as to be comparable to a toddlers understanding of classical mechanics. You're a poser, an ideological golem mindlessly roving the internet, muttering "LIBERAL BAD," "DA WEST IS FALLING," "KEKED," "TAKE DA REDPILL," "NPC," and other assorted pre-programed drivel. You're dumb, an idiot, a poorly educated cripple whose education in western thought comes from image macros created by the menagerie of mouth breathers formally known as /pol/. I doubt you've read a book in your life, I doubt you've done anything but wallow in your own ignorance for the entirety of your conscious existence (if you can even call what you have consciousness!). I can't wait until the website splits and you glue eating tards are finally contained in your own containment site. Before you reply to me with one of your many thought terminating cliches, know that I'm closing this thread the second I finish this post, so I won't be reading it. Eat a dick.

[Anonymous No.12102517]

>>12102075
>hailed as arch liberal to which all democracies cow-tow towards
>when actually designing a government for South Carolina and not his own faggot MySpace post he uses manorialism, feudalistic tithes, and aristocratic privilege that's actually more strict than even the harshest Tory in England wants.

Was Big Cocke secretly /ourguy/?

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/17th_century/nc05.asp

[Anonymous No.12102530]

>>12102075
OP is generally right, but to be clear about why, enlightenment ideals and abstract principles were not necessarily negative things in themselves and are in fact reflections of European man's fair and noble nature, but the problem is that jews were able to push such things to their extremes and use them against us, to the point where equality is used to bludgeon the strong and insulate jewish power with the weak (women and minorities), and many whites are afraid to express their group interests due to this universalist myopia perpetuated that states that Paco and Pajeet care about freedom and liberty and "our values" too and therefore must be let into white countries, when the fact is they don't give a fuck and are only coming en masse to take our resources.

It's not about the ideas, which aren't ruinous in themselves; it's about who promotes them, what version of them gets promoted, and whose interests their promotion ultimately benefits.

[Anonymous No.12102544]

>>12102075
*smugly chuckles*
Have you even read him?

[Anonymous No.12102548]

>>12102544
I've read the wikipedia header, you neolib scum

[Anonymous No.12102558]

>>12102211
>what is advertising
>what is monopoly
>what is cartel behavior

[Anonymous No.12102568]

>>12102548
*smugly chuckles*
I bet you're an alt-righter.

[Anonymous No.12102607]

>>12102530
The ideas actually are bad because they're counter to reality in almost all cases.

>it's the jews
Jews were basically just collaborators with elements of the native European elite who were blamed when things went south. You can't blame them for wielding power in the first place when someone has to let them into positions of power in the first place.

[Anonymous No.12102619]

>>12102211
hahaha oh my god. please, if you're actually retarded tell me and i won't make fun of you as much, but holy shit

[Anonymous No.12102719]

>>12102568
Omg sick take down burn of dumb collectivist right-wing SJWs my dumb cunt of a mom doesn't understand liberal parenting like you do man,

Screw the optics, I'm asserting my natural right to fortnite! Epic Kekistani Jihad Shadilay brothers.

[Anonymous No.12102836]

>>12102607
>Jews were basically just collaborators with elements of the native European elite who were blamed when things went south

>muh scapegoat
lol, no one buys this anymore. Jews are not collaborators with European elites, which implies less or equal involvement, they are the perpetuators of ideologies. This is why your ancestors worshiped jews for centuries before you.

>You can't blame them for wielding power

Yes, we can. And we can kick them the fuck out for it as well. Jews are the enemy of the west they do not belong.

[Anonymous No.12102901]

>>12102836
After 1 or 2 expulsions, you can consider Jews the prime mover. After 100+ you have to wonder why they keep being let into power.

>they are the perpetuators of ideologies.
What, and they just randomly caught on one day? New ideologies, religions, etc. don't simply catch on spontaneously, elite promotion is a necessary condition.

[Anonymous No.12102950]

>>12102487
Agreed with everything you said and then I saw the cartoon picture. Kys weeb.

[Anonymous No.12102955]

>>12102901
Are you seriously implying 359 jewish expulsions put the blame on anyone else? Jews bribe elites so they can jew and get thrown out once the people catch up to the scheming, but it still begins and ends with the jew. We can deal with our own but jews are alien outsiders who don't belong in the first place.

As for ideology, jews are fanatics, which is why they have been the primary spreaders of the main universalist ideologies for the last couple thousand years. Christianity, communism, and modern liberalism -- jews are always the primary movers.

[Anonymous No.12102992]

>>12102955
>Jews bribe elites
So finally we've realized that elites who invite them into power for the 300+th time are the ones principally at fault, since they are the ones with the ability to admit Jews into positions of power, or not. After 1-2 expulsions you can be forgiven for this, after 300+ it's pure malice on the part of the elite. I'm sure 1000 years from now some people will be talking about how Jews have been expelled 600 times right as they're admitted into power in some other country for the 601st time...

>which is why they have been the primary spreaders of the main universalist ideologies for the last couple thousand years.
The British are far more culpable here. Every left-wing ideology today is thoroughly British, and worse, they really believe it.

[Anonymous No.12103023]

>>12102992
That is just not a reasonable conclusion to draw. Information back when was not what it is today, so jewish behavior was less well known, and less effective as well. Whites have no problem punishing their own, but it's jews who cause the problems.

>The British are far more culpable here. Every left-wing ideology today is thoroughly British

This is total nonsense. The modern left is an extension of the jew, which is why it attacks white men, whom the jew sees as their primary enemy.

[Anonymous No.12103029]

>>12103023
>This is total nonsense. The modern left is an extension of the jew, which is why it attacks white men, whom the jew sees as their primary enemy.
No it isn't. Modern liberalism is nothing but English liberalism taken to its logical conclusion.

[Anonymous No.12103060]

>>12103029
Absolutely not, it is jewish egalitarian slave ideology taken to its logical conclusion. The jew empowers the weak over the strong and uses them against the host society's elite, whom the jew wishes to replace with jews. That is all Christianity, communism, and modern liberalism is/was, using women and minorities and the weak against white men to insulate jewish power. Now there are aspects of traditional liberalism that had more of a European flare, but it is fundamentally jewish and an extension of jewish Christianity.

[Anonymous No.12103079]

>>12103060
There's nothing Jewish about Christianity, minus it's early history. From the first century onwards Christianity has been influenced and directed by western thought. And it was almost always Christian priests who instigated expulsions and pogroms against Jews in the West.

[Anonymous No.12103089]

Tabula Rasa is the worst idea in all of ontological thought and his 600 page essay on it sucks so much dick

[Anonymous No.12103098]

>>12103060
You're sort of getting it. The mechanism at work is a high-low coalition mobilized by a power-seeking elite to abolish intermediary institutions between the State and the general population, typically instigated by a mercantile elite in alliance with what can be identified as the radical left. Egalitarianism, Lockean theories in general, Hobbesian theories in general, all flow from this concept.

[Anonymous No.12103121]

>>12103098
>>12103060
The great thing about Jews from the perspective of said mercantile elite is that you can admit them, promote them to power, ally with them (as both parties are bad actors looking to make money and gain power), then blame them when people start to get upset, cry to the King about it, get them kicked out, avoid blame, then rinse and repeat in the future.

[Anonymous No.12103127]

>>12103089
Locke's property theories are just as bad desu

[Anonymous No.12103128]

>>12103079
>There's nothing Jewish about Christianity, minus it's early history.

LOL, kind of a big deal there, pal, that the originators and spreaders of Christianity were all jewish, and that it was used by jews as a weapon against Romans and Europeans generally. Christianity is jewish to its core.

>>12103098
It's not that Saileresque or intentional; the high-low coalition outcome is more just a result of jewing, and modern jewing specifically. Jews hate all of western society, so they attack it all, from the top to the bottom and pit everyone against each other, but historically, as outsiders, they have led the "slave revolt" by brainwashing the plebs into overthrowing the elite so jews can take power.

[Anonymous No.12103130]

>>12103079
>there's nothing Jewish about Christianity
>except its founder, the earliest theologians, and its theology
you're not helping your case there, bud.

[Anonymous No.12103142]

>>12103128
>It's not that Saileresque or intentional; the high-low coalition outcome is more just a result of jewing, and modern jewing specifically.
It goes back hundreds of years, so it depends on where you are demarcating "modern".

[Anonymous No.12103149]

>>12103121
>then blame them
Again, jews are to blame, then and now. They are not scapegoats. They attack the host population and are generally hostile, which is why they are the ones promoting mass immigration. White elites are going along with out of fear of jews attacking them through the media and financially if they go against the jewish agenda.

[Anonymous No.12103160]

>>12103130
It's theology negated Jewish theology that's why no Jew is a Christian. The fact that Jesus and the apostles were Jews is irrelevant. Many jews were integral to the advancement of science, are you going to stop using the technology that strems from their contributions because they were Jewish? Man you /pol/tards fail at basic reasoning.

[Anonymous No.12103170]

>>12103142
Jews did not interact much with European society or were kept in check prior to the early 1800s. After that they used communism to attack the European elite. It is only in recent, or modern/postwar, times that you get all this extreme intersectional jewing and the high-low coalition as Steve Sailer talks about. There either wasn't a middle class before or jews weren't in a position to fear a backlash from it as they are worried about now.

[Anonymous No.12103178]

>>12103149
>fear of Jews
Jews wield literally no army, if the host elite wanted to remove Jews they could do so in a day with a military coup. The host elites are enjoying getting rich and collaborating with them far too much to remove them. Eventually when things get bad enough Jews will be blamed, they'll be expelled for time #340, time will pass and the incident will be memory-holed, they'll be invited back in to engage in their usual behavior at the behest of mercantile faction of the host elite and the cycle will start up again.

[Anonymous No.12103189]

>>12103170
>Jews did not interact much with European society or were kept in check prior to the early 1800s.
Just ignore the whole Glorious Revolution for example.

>It is only in recent, or modern/postwar, times that you get all this extreme intersectional jewing and the high-low coalition as Steve Sailer talks about.
No, high-low coalitions go way farther back than the post-WW2 era.

[Anonymous No.12103190]

>>12103160
This sounds like a post by someone rationalizing their Christianity/jew-worship. Jewish fanatics stole a bunch of Greek tales, reworked them, pushed them on the jews, the jews said no but once they saw the negative effect this jewish Christian mystery school thing was having on Rome, they promoted the hell out of it.

[Anonymous No.12103210]

>>12103190
And this sounds like the ravings of a /pol/tard masquerading as an argument.

[Anonymous No.12103218]

>>12103178
>when things get bad enough Jews will be blamed
And rightfully, because they are to blame. That they have incentivized a small group of Europeans to do their bidding for them does not exclude them from rightful blame. But with information the way it is now, they won't be let back in.

>>12103189
It's just less clear, more behind the scenes. I am open to hearing an older example of the high-low coalition if you have one though.

[Anonymous No.12103223]

>>12103218
>But with information the way it is now, they won't be let back in.
I absolutely guarantee you that it will happen in exactly the way I described.

[Anonymous No.12103385]

>>12103223
Well, it won't. Everyone and their sister is going to know about jewish nature/behavior in the future at the rate it's spreading and due to the growing abundance of information about it. Jews were able to jew largely undetected before because of crypsis and the slow and unclear way information spread, which are fundamental elements of their ethnic strategy that will continue to decrease in effectiveness unless they are able to destroy the internet.

[Anonymous No.12103877]

>Locke thread
>turns into Jew thread
This is a common trend with /lit/

[Anonymous No.12103915]

>>12103877
Well, it IS a thread about an Englishman. There's a big worldview overlap.

[Anonymous No.12103922]

>>12103877
The only weird thing is that you think you can separate jews from anything. They are authoritarian psychopaths who crave power and put their hand in everything.

>The philosopher and novelist Rebecca Newberger Goldstein argues that during his five years in Holland, Locke chose his friends "from among the same freethinking members of dissenting Protestant groups as Spinoza's small group of loyal confidants. [Baruch Spinoza had died in 1677.] Locke almost certainly met men in Amsterdam who spoke of the ideas of that renegade Jew who... insisted on identifying himself through his religion of reason alone." While she says that "Locke's strong empiricist tendencies" would have "disinclined him to read a grandly metaphysical work such as Spinoza's Ethics, in other ways he was deeply receptive to Spinoza's ideas, most particularly to the rationalist's well thought out argument for political and religious tolerance and the necessity of the separation of church and state."[19]

[Anonymous No.12103972]

>>12103922
You got this from fucking wikipedia. And an argument based on lack of proof is not an argument.

[Anonymous No.12104011]

>>12103972
So what? You idiots who think you can understand the world without accounting heavily for the jewish problem are wasting your time pretending to be intellectuals.

Spinoza was promoting a unique (for the time) version of jewish interests that trended away from Christianity. It was classical jewing: taking phenomena that appeal to European nature and guiding it in directions that were good for jews.

That's partly how we ended up here. It's not complicated, there's no conspiracy, but you have to understand how the jew thinks. Otherwise you're lost.

[Anonymous No.12104048]

>>12104011
I never said there wasn't a jewish problem. I believe there is to a certain extant. But if you are in real life like you come across in your posts then you're clearly deranged.

For one, that Jewess is wrong saying Spinoza was for the separation of church and state as he actually argued for a society in which the state had final say on how religion is outwardly practiced. I think it's more likely that Locke's thought was drawn from political developments that took place during the English Civil War which included republican rule, equal rights, free speech, and religious tolerance (something that had already been hotly debated in Europe since the beginning of the reformation and had plenty of opponents for and against it already by the time Spinoza was just getting ready for his bar mitzvah)

[Anonymous No.12104097]

>>12104048
Then edit the Wikipedia page. But Spinoza and the couple stances you mentioned make my point. The difference is that you're taking this jew at his word and not considering the underlying, tribal reasons for holding such stances, since jews are not ideological like you are, and not fully acknowledging how this "jewish problem" does not simply mean "jew x said y so Locke did z." They have been entrenched in the west for centuries and the reason there were all these problems in the first place was largely due to bickering over social models and morality systems imposed by people who were doing the bidding of jews to begin with a la Christianity.

[Anonymous No.12104176]

Were the Jews actually behind Hitler? It was all a ruse to gain power over Germany and then blame it on the Germans?

[Anonymous No.12104182]

>>12104097
>Then edit the Wikipedia page
Simply taking something out is considered vandalism for some reason and would get reverted pretty quickly. Besides, it just shows that you shouldn't take to heart everything you read on wikipedia since any asshole can change the article to support their own opinions.

>the couple stances you mentioned make my point
What stances? The English Civil War ones? Because most of those developed before Cromwell let the Jews back into England so you's have a hard time convincing me the Jews did those things too.

Really though you need to calm the fuck down and realize that you're not gonna convert anyone to your side just by going around and shouting jews this and jews that. You need to have some nuance in your rhetoric and realize not everyone sees things the way you do or else you just come off as a crazy person.

[Anonymous No.12104197]

>>12104176
Jewish bankers funded him but then he arrested a Rothchild and tried to force the jews out of Germany (though not exterminate them, mind you), and jews think they are a divine right to live in our countries so they turned the guns on him.

[Anonymous No.12104263]

>>12104182
I think you are the one misinterpreting things here, the two instances being taking my edit the Wikipedia page comment literally and being under some strange impression that I'm shouting. You just aren't used to hearing people speak openly about jews, which is understandable, but this is just reality.

>the Jews did those things too.
See, since you are meeting me somewhat half way on the existence of a jewish problem so I am giving you a nuanced take on their behavior. But that does not involve me saying "the jews did x," which I would never say because that's not how it works. Jews and jewish ideology have been entrenched in the west for centuries. It's not about them proactively doing things, usually, but influencing them subtly and guiding ideas like those of John Locke in directions that are good for them since the French Revolution, though obviously before as well. All I had to do was search Spinoza's name on Wikipedia to find a connection upon suspecting one and not having looked into it. And the point is not that it's necessarily true or provable, but that it's always there, and that you will miss a whole lot if you don't know what to look for. Understand?

[Anonymous No.12104292]

>>12104263
>You just aren't used to hearing people speak openly about jews
I've been on /pol/ plenty anon

>influencing them subtly and guiding ideas like those of John Locke
And again, that woman (and you) offers no proof of her claims and basically takes it on basis of belief. There is no hard evidence that Locke read or was influenced by Spinoza and you'll probably have a hard time finding any.

[Anonymous No.12104357]

>>12104292
Well I've never posted on pol. Locke is undergrad-tier shit I haven't cared about in a while, but you don't think he could have been influenced by the Dutch jews she mentioned? I find it unlikely he wouldn't have been seeing how much of a merchant cesspit Amsterdam surely was at the time. I will give you the benefit of the doubt, obviously having read the jewesses name, but my point was something greater that is getting lost in this discussion. I am making a point about the jewish problem and how my instincts are good in sensing he *may* have been influenced by Spinoza's secular jewing. We don't know either way.

[Anonymous No.12105099]

>>12102291
A company is not morally responsible for the soii people caring too much about the packaging. Milking them of their money to buy junk is, ig anything, a good thing. Lots of issues with apple but this isn't one of them.

[Anonymous No.12105188]

>>12103089
This.

[Anonymous No.12105371]

>>12102299
>effeminate

[Anonymous No.12105385]

>>12105188
>psychology
>a science

[Anonymous No.12105400]

>>12102487

Creative and well-written. Have a (You).

[Anonymous No.12105478]

>>12102950
*dabs in anime*

[Anonymous No.12105489]

>>12102487
is this a new pasta?

[Anonymous No.12105667]

>>12105385
>>a science
It is. Albeit a soft science, it still utilizes evidenced based inquires that use the scientific method

[Anonymous No.12105717]

>>12105371
yes, effeminate. got a problem with that?

[Anonymous No.12105801]

>try something
>just can't keep it from ending up in mass starvation, genocide, or revolution
>"let's just keep trying"
>fucked up on eastern thought

[Anonymous No.12105802]

His face is eerily similar to the NPC face.

[Anonymous No.12105805]

>>12102097
>implying I need a government to handle my affairs.
Seems like you haven't first mastered yourself ya nogunz faggot.

[Anonymous No.12105824]

>>12105805
what is your answer to the tragedy of the commons?

[Anonymous No.12105882]

>>12105824
That any political philosophy that has been hatched to address it has invariably worsened it according to historical example. Nihilism and Transcendentalism rose on a similar timeline and the geographical locations in which the doctrines were widely accepted can shed a light on the benefits of those ideals by their current world standings and recent histories.

Parietal distribution is common throughout the natural world, it is very natural to find it in our societies. To inherently infer that it is immoral is a biased view. Inequity is not synonymous with wrongdoing. In fact, it is often the catalyst for progress that even the relative poor benefit from on whole.

Master yourself before trying to become the master of others. You can't try to solve the tragedy of commons if you're a likewise underperforming nogunz "muh power structures" excuse-artist. To pre-empt lazy label accusations; no, I'm not right wing and no I don't like Jordan Peterson.

[Anonymous No.12105934]

>>12105882
I see no positive answer to my question, merely a refutation of the implied solution.

[Anonymous No.12105950]

>>12105934
"Tragedy of Commons" implies there's a problem to be fixed. I pose that there is nothing truly to be fixed as inequity is not inherently bad and parietal distribution is natural.

[Anonymous No.12105962]

>>12102075
Locke was a hero that's what

[Anonymous No.12105968]

>>12102487
This would be such a good post if the image was different
4/10

[Anonymous No.12105977]

>>12105950
What's your take on ethics?

[Anonymous No.12105978]

>>12105977
>ethics

[Anonymous No.12105985]

>>12105978
Well, then you're either
1) some sort of misguided post-structuralist who learned only the wrong lessons of Nietzsche
2) some sort of misguided might-makes-right Nietzchean who also learned only the wrong lessons of Nietzsche
Either way, leave politics to grownups, sweetie

[Anonymous No.12105989]

>>12105977
Is you're response to me saying inequity isnt an issue about to be some sort of accusation that I have bad or inconsistent ethics? Because that's pretty much SJW tier shit slinging. "He doesn't agree so he's RACIST"

[Anonymous No.12105992]

>>12105985
>learned the "wrong" lessons
leave

[Anonymous No.12105994]

>>12105985
That's wasn't me
>>12105989
This was. Also
>you're
Your

[Anonymous No.12105999]

>>12102205
>You don't think big corps get big because they have a genuinely superior product right?
They unironically do, just not in the way that you think.

[Anonymous No.12106019]

>>12105989
>disagree with foundational ideological concept
>retorts with questioning ethics
That's exactly what he's about to do anon. May as well just stop now. Daddy Locke is too much for NPC logic.

[Anonymous No.12106020]

>>12102487
I KNOW YOU'RE READING THIS FAGGOT

[Anonymous No.12106022]

>>12105989
I'm just trying to see how you ethically interpret this situation. Apologies for using the rationalists, but for all their faults they have clear and understandable examples.

[Anonymous No.12106030]

>>12102487
Same with the others on the picture. I thought it was tacky and underrepresented your rhetorical voice. The pontificating attack on the emptiness of the opponent's language mixed with your own, confirms your tediousness in a mixed veil of an argument intertwined with insight. Have a (you), friend.

[Anonymous No.12106056]

*chuggles smuckley*
i can tell you havent READ him

[Anonymous No.12106082]

>>12106022
I'd move to an different lake. The market is oversatursted and not sustainable and I'd blame my lack of profits more on my choices of business location and model than someone else's choice to filter.

[Anonymous No.12106086]

>>12105667
Yeah, but due to its nature and methodology, it can never achieve actual knowledge about the things it studies, like a chemist can about chemical reactions.

[Anonymous No.12106123]

>>12106082
So there's nothing ethically wrong with strip mining or simply drying the lake to get all the fish in one go, then moving on? Is it OK to treat nature & other resources as merely a means to an end?

[Anonymous No.12106124]

>>12102097
>a demoralized wage-slave critiques the failings of le common man *tips fedora*
Pots, kettles, lmao

[Anonymous No.12106128]

>>12106082
oh god youre one of those nap cucklords and exactly the type of shit op describes.

[Anonymous No.12106160]

>>12106123
Slippery slope my dude. I said 1000 fisherman on a single lake isn't sustainable. You cant extrapolate that out to mean I'm okay decimating countrysides at a time.

See >>12105989 .
You're focus is very evidently to just try and call me a bad person, hence how quickly you're willing to use the above hyperbole.

>>12106019
Didnt want you to be right but you're right.

[Anonymous No.12106164]

>>12106160
>you're
Fuck my phone.
Your

[Anonymous No.12106193]

>>12106160
I'm just trying to understand on on what basis is it OK to exhaust depletable resources and how ecology might fit into this? Saying you'll move to another lake is good an all, but that's just moving the problem forward. What about overfishing in the ocean?

Good men doing things they want can and will have consequences down the road. Chesterton's fence, my friend.

[Anonymous No.12106250]

>>12106193
Not be be pedantic but we're operating under the given that resources are being exhausted. Obviously that's bad business and completely against the self insterest ot the business. For the situation to really hold true we have to assume business operate in such a blind fashion that they'll ravenously and obviously run all their resources dry.

While this has happened, it absolutely isn't the commonplace modus operandi for any business.

The ethics situation you posed requires so many assumptions that are the opposite of most common practices that it can be be very well accused to being completely engineered to further one specific idea rather than to be a test of all rubrics.

Basically the situation isn't a very good thought experiment because it was created with an ideological bent to begin with.

[Anonymous No.12106257]

>>12103922
/pol/ was a mistake

[Anonymous No.12106290]

>>12102487
Ritsu is better.

[Anonymous No.12107011]

>>12102075

Smith>Locke

/thread

[Anonymous No.12107026]

>>12107011
Yes but you have to actually read Smith not just larp about it

[Anonymous No.12107060]

>>12106193

It is exactly this manufacturing that Adam Smith critiqued, and Locke supported.

That's why

Smith>Locke

Lrn

[Anonymous No.12107089]

>>12107026

I have read some Smith.

Interestingly, an anarchist system would solve for manufacturing because there could be many systems within one organization. For instance, one could use a different time calendar system, other than the Gregorian, etc.

[Anonymous No.12107101]

>>12107026

What's your favorite Smith insight?

[Anonymous No.12107154]

>>12102487

[Anonymous No.12107255]

>>12102075
That's Voltaire, not Locke.

[Anonymous No.12108025]

Bump

[Anonymous No.12109002]

Lit really is the shittiest board

[Anonymous No.12109111]

>>12105717
thats why the gov is bad you furry fag

[Anonymous No.12109119]

>>12102097
t. bootlicker cuck

[Anonymous No.12109122]

>>12102075
>a good german is a dead german

[Anonymous No.12109129]

>>12102487
Should've posted Derrida instead of anime chick

[Anonymous No.12109170]

>>12106128
LOL I got one too

[Anonymous No.12109205]

>>12102719
Imagine taking the bait this hard...
samefag get out

[Anonymous No.12109781]

>>12109170
Pathetic.

[Anonymous No.12111176]

>>12102291
>apple
Apple products are genuinely superior for the 99% of humanity who hate thinking.