/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13126141]

Why did this book have so little impact? Bernie lost all his hype and Biden is running away with it.

[Anonymous No.13126150]

Irony poisoning

[Anonymous No.13126163]

>>13126141
>>13126150
We are a phrase in Italy, used by everyone, not only rightwingers "deluso di sinistra", which means "failed and deluded leftwinger".
Basically the post 70s left never wins

[Anonymous No.13126172]

>300+ replies

[Anonymous No.13126524]

remember when the daily show put out a book? the chapo book felt like if the trevor noah era daily show put out a book. also in audiobook form it just came off as a worse version of the podcast.

[Anonymous No.13126542]

I read the first two sentences and I've been rooting for the total annihilation of the US ever since.

[Anonymous No.13126767]

>>13126542
That's the intended effect.

[Anonymous No.13126827]

>>13126524
Even when compared to hack liberal tv comedians they poke fun at, they’re rather poor humorists. The didacticism just ruins the jokes.

The only good part of the book were the fake Chesterton quotes.

[Anonymous No.13127125]

>>13126141
Bernie got big because there was no other choices and the dnc pretended that was a good thing.

[Anonymous No.13127140]

I don't know anything about these guys but I do see their fans calling people "chuds" and it comes off as really tryhard.

[Anonymous No.13127179]

>>13127140
the way things are heading those fans are going to get their subreddit banned

[Anonymous No.13127195]

>>13126141

[Anonymous No.13127222]

>>13127140
Just seems like their version of "cuck" but just doesnt have the bite of cuck

[Anonymous No.13127610]

>>13126141
>why did a book banged out in a weekend by coked up Brooklyn podcasters fail to influence a national primary

Come on. I like Chapo for the most part but realize they have a limited audience and a set ceiling for how many people can be won over to their Twitter-irony poisoned side. Like 95% of the people who vote in primaries are over 30.

If you want to gauge the popularity of the dirtbag left, you might say the rise of membership in the DSA since 2016 points to its growing popularity. But, their influence on the Democratic party is obviously next to zero and they'd admit before anyone.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » mxvabIoSIE No.13127711]

>>13126542
based

[Anonymous No.13127900]

>>13126141
guarantee if Biden gets the nomination Trump wins again and stays in power for YEARS. If its means the castration of the Dems, fine, but the real Leftists will lose their shit

[Anonymous No.13127985]

>>13127900
Thats what they want, DNC wants the moderate that will lose the election but save the party. The alienated left will go to the green party, remember that huge crash influx Jill got for the 'recount?' It keeps the DNC from splitting and they get to blame everyone who went green for giving the election to trump which will guilt enough people back in line to keep the party viable.

[Anonymous No.13128011]

>>13127195
Rolling, but if I get dubs I'm just jacking off to foot porn.

[Anonymous No.13128026]

>>13128011
based

[Anonymous No.13128027]

>>13127610
Based take. The online/dirtbag left has little influence in American politics, despite Pelosi and Schumer’s closed-door meetings on how to stifle the lefty bugaboo. The far right runs this country - either directly, through the legislature and presidency, or indirectly, through public discourse. Chapo is a small fly on the ass of a very, very, very large and indifferent elephant

[Anonymous No.13128036]

>>13126141
Because the American people, despite their numerous vices, do have some level of commonsense.

[Anonymous No.13128054]

>>13128026
People talk shit about feet, but they've never failed me yet.

[Anonymous No.13128063]

>>13128027
>The far right runs this country
managerial gynocracy globohomo leviathan needs the far right to exist in order to justify and extend its own power. Since Trump won, things have only gotten more gay.

[Anonymous No.13128089]

>>13128027
>>13128063
the degree to which people on the far left and far right have both convinced themselves that they've done nothing but lose for the past 50 years and the party who closely approximates their views is run by spineless opportunists is instructive

[Anonymous No.13128117]

>>13128089
Flying the Soviet flag doesn't get you in shit, flying the Nazi flag does. Pretty clear that the establishment favors the far left

[Anonymous No.13128121]

>>13127179
spoonfeed me on what's the deal with chapotraphouse, why can't people stop talking about them. afaik they're just some random lefties, why are they so popular?

[Anonymous No.13128126]

>>13128117
Imagine basing your views of intellectual hegemony on “why can’t I fly my nazi flag” you should feel embarrassed

[Anonymous No.13128127]

>>13126141
If you are disilussioned with Chapo trap house and their shitty book, you should read SIEGE by James Mason. Order of Nine Angles bro, Black Sun, Charles Manson, revolutionary satanic genocide, pol pot for white people. it's not ironic or post ironic, it's initiatic, we must harness the acausal power of the unspeakable, the foulest and most debased atrocity, in order to achieve the impossible, the realisation of the doctrines of esoteric hitlerism, and the resurrection of the fuhrer, adolf hitler, now in full force as Kalki the destroyer.

[Anonymous No.13128129]

>>13128126
That's not an argument. You can be openly Marxist at havard or Google and not get in trouble. you cannot be fascist

[Anonymous No.13128158]

>>13128117
for a variety of reasons public awareness of the crimes of Nazism is simply greater than those of the Soviet Union. Leftist influence in the education system is one such reason.ff

[Anonymous No.13128161]

>>13128126
Hitlerism is the ultimate and most radical form of anarchism. there is nothing more radical transgressive punk rock or counterculture than literally worshipping Hitler.

[Anonymous No.13128168]

>>13128121
Uncharitably they’re the voice of the “dirtbag left,” an ill-defined group of 20something failsons who say retard and faggot but call their mom every Sunday night, who hold useless degrees and wagecuck with three roommates, who wear Marxism like a too-big shirt from high school, and who all are PROUD FEMINISTS but ask their girlfriends for threesomes when they get drunk and then claim not to remember it. Charitably they voice the frustrations and anger of left leaning millennials who feel disenfranchised by two parties that fuck them over at every single turn, kind of like some kind of podcast catharsis.

[Anonymous No.13128182]

>>13128129
This is still the same “I’m oppressed because I can’t wear my HITLER ROCKS t-shirt” anon, sorry

[Anonymous No.13128193]

>>13128168
chapo is millenial af, to zoomers chapos are the squares, man, white kids are aching for rebellion, danger and destruction, they are looking for the new punk rock and the next limp bizkit, drink the boomer juice and blow it all up

[Anonymous No.13128194]

>>13128182
My argument was that being far left is accepted by the establishment while being far right is not. 'i cant wear my hitler tshirt' is evidence of that, as are the many Marxists in the Ivy League and the people with marxist sympathies in places like Google.

You have zero argument, you should stop now because you're making your own position look worse by being so shit at thinking

[Anonymous No.13128196]

>>13128121
they had a built in audience on twitter, several thousand followers each, and were pretty popular with the weird twitter/ex-FYAD crowd, and they started the podcast at pretty much the perfect time to capitalize on the lead up to the election. they're "dirtbag left" which means they say actively shit on and hate the west wing loving neoliberals who ran things under obama.

>>13128168
>retard and faggot
they stopped saying those for fear of being cancelled now that they're big and rake in hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.

[Anonymous No.13128230]

>>13128194
>I’m oppressed because I can’t wear my Hitler t-shirt
Thanks for the chuckle anon it’s been a rough day and I needed a laugh

[Anonymous No.13128242]

>>13128230
You're very fixated on the word oppressed which I never used. I said 'accepted'. It is beyond a doubt that it is more acceptable to praise Stalin than Hitler

continue to make yourself look retarded though by all means

[Anonymous No.13128245]

>>13126141
This book looks so cringe. I don't even need to open the book to know it's shit and unfunny.

[Anonymous No.13128247]

>>13128230
I'm pretty sure you can't wear a Trump shirt at Google either, just saying. (Not that guy and fuck Trump desu.)

[Anonymous No.13128258]

>>13126141
Because every other week some DSA dipshit says something like "I find the holocaust calming" and lose all credibility with the American public.

[Anonymous No.13128259]

>>13126141
Biden is getting more media coverage than all the other candidate combined. That’s not hyperbole, 538 just had an article showing off the numbers. There is a clear favourite among the media class.

[Anonymous No.13128265]

>>13128242
>I SAID I’M OPPRESSED BECAUSE I CAN’T WEAR MY HITLER SHIRT STOP LAUGHING AT ME
kek

[Anonymous No.13128270]

>>13128265
each time you post and manage to still not understand a very basic point you just look dumber

[Anonymous No.13128275]

>>13128011
Based

[Anonymous No.13128277]

>>13128121
listen to red scare and cumtown instead, millenial brooklyn cokeheads are more entretaining when they don't pretend they are anything else but retarded

[Anonymous No.13128278]

>>13128265
The Anon never said that you retard

[Anonymous No.13128284]

>>13128194
>My argument was that being far left is accepted by the establishment while being far right is not.
That depends on how you define (far) left.
Nationalism is pretty left, but it's not accepted. Neither is wealth redistribution. Or true democracy...

[Anonymous No.13128292]

>>13128270
Get a different shirt dude lol

[Anonymous No.13128304]

>>13128247
Paul Gottfried was right, CIA is trying to make you gay

[Anonymous No.13128308]

>>13128292
You've thoroughly embarrassed yourself and playing dumb by repeating the same thing over and over just makes it worse

[Anonymous No.13128314]

>>13128270
Can I interest you in an unmarked black tshirt during this trying time

[Anonymous No.13128318]

>>13128308
I don't see why you need to wear that specific shirt. There's other ways to express yourself.

[Anonymous No.13128319]

>>13128314
I get why you guys tend to stay on your subreddit, this is just sad

[Anonymous No.13128320]

>>13128127
I couldn't get halfway through this post

[Anonymous No.13128321]

>>13128308
Don’t worry anon I think your Hitler tattoo is really cool and edgy

[Anonymous No.13128330]

>>13128321
Do you really not know any form language other than 'say snarky stuff so my chapo bros upvote it'

[Anonymous No.13128331]

>>13128129
You can be a Marxist without wanting to murder babies, you can't be a Nazi without wanting to murder babies. Fix your heart dipshit

[Anonymous No.13128332]

>>13128319
Chin up! I bet you could wear and Oswald Mosely shirt and nobody would notice.

[Anonymous No.13128335]

>>13128319
>>13128314
both you faggots are on an anime imageboard about pretentious books jesus christ stop trying to play more ironically distanced than thou

[Anonymous No.13128340]

>>13128284
>Nationalism is pretty left
anon...

[Anonymous No.13128341]

>>13128331
Nothing about the theory of National Socialism involves killing babies actually

[Anonymous No.13128343]

>>13128331
Any marxist who isn't 100% with murdering babies(aka feminism) will instantly be ostracised by other marxists

[Anonymous No.13128348]

>>13128335
>I have a T-shirt with Hitler on one side and Stalin on the other I win

[Anonymous No.13128357]

>>13128332
The joke wasn't even funny the first time, you've now repeated it about a dozen times because you're so dumb you can't even try to engage with what is being said.

[Anonymous No.13128360]

>>13128341
Never thought I’d see the nazi version of “true fascism has never been tried”

[Anonymous No.13128361]

>>13126141
The only people who would buy something like this are people who listen to the pod already or post on the subreddit (there's not a huge overlap between those two groups but still)

[Anonymous No.13128366]

>>13128341
Where do the foreigners go?

[Anonymous No.13128369]

>>13128360
Well it doesn't any more than Marxism does

[Anonymous No.13128372]

>>13128357
>DEBATE ME

[Anonymous No.13128373]

>>13128343
if you knew how retarded that statement was you wouldn't have posted it

[Anonymous No.13128382]

>>13128372
Once again what you're doing only works on reddit or twitter or wherever, you just look incredibly dumb here

[Anonymous No.13128384]

>>13128357
you should start a gofundme so you can afford better t-shirts
or just dress like an adult, whatever

[Anonymous No.13128386]

>>13128340
Nationalism literally started as a leftist political movement. Go read some history.
Nationalism effectively means giving power to the people, as opposed to cosmopolitan elites.
Nationalization of resources was an essential step in communist revolutions.

[Anonymous No.13128391]

>>13128382
mentioning reddit is corncobbing, every time

[Anonymous No.13128392]

>>13128384
>haha i said it again
What's said is that you lack the intelligence to argue but you also lack the wit to be dismissively funny, youre just bad at everything

[Anonymous No.13128402]

>>13128386
only starting with Lenin. early marxism was post-national. pre-marx "leftism" is pretty hard to define

[Anonymous No.13128406]

>>13128392
>please debate me

[Anonymous No.13128407]

>>13128366
They can go wherever they want. Or they can stay and live as second class citizens.
Anyway, no killing is required.

[Anonymous No.13128410]

>>13128392
sorry people are throwing milkshakes at you because of your creepy hitler outfits but that's your problem, not mine

[Anonymous No.13128411]

>>13128402
>pre-marx "leftism" is pretty hard to define
post-marx leftism too desu

[Anonymous No.13128415]

>seething chapofags itt

[Anonymous No.13128417]

>>13128407
>second class citizens
sounds like ultraviolence to me. you're too cowardly to defend your own political fetishes. coward :)

[Anonymous No.13128419]

>every single post in this thread
please just go back to >>>/r/eddit

[Anonymous No.13128423]

>>13128194
>and the people with marxist sympathies in places like Google.
WHERE ARE THE MARXISTS?

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » mxvabIoSIE No.13128424]

>>13128391
>corncobbing

reddit

[Anonymous No.13128427]

>>13128415
I did not consent for you to post this photo of me, delete it immediately

[Anonymous No.13128429]

>>13128406
>>13128410
I get that you guys arent funny enough to be posting on twitter with the people you look up to but you dont have to shit up 4chan

[Anonymous No.13128432]

>>13128036
>Non-critically embracing the status quo is common sense.
Why can't this shit meme die already? It's unironically pure ideological brainwashing.

[Anonymous No.13128434]

>>13128427
>I did not consent for you to post this photo of me, delete it immediately

[Anonymous No.13128435]

>>13128417
>sounds like ultraviolence to me.
What's ultraviolent about getting less gibs? Are you one of those pink haired "SJWs" Ben Shapiro talks about?

[Anonymous No.13128446]

>>13128417
yeah it's so brave to be a Marxist in 2019 lmao

[Anonymous No.13128447]

>>13128435
my hair is brown

[Anonymous No.13128451]

>>13128429
what's a hitler t-shirt, anyway, is it a picture of him? or does it just say the word "hitler"? either way it sounds like it sucks and it sounds like you suck

[Anonymous No.13128452]

>>13128447
>my hair is brown

[Anonymous No.13128454]

>>13128447
Answer the first question. Jeez, no wonder Ben Shapiro owns you liberals so easily...

[Anonymous No.13128457]

>>13128432
your reading comprehension is poor as is your understanding of US public opinion

[Anonymous No.13128470]

>>13128429
You’re on an anime imageboard, not sure why you think you have the high ground here

[Anonymous No.13128472]

>>13128407
What if they get fed up with being second class citizens?

[Anonymous No.13128490]

>>13128472
We're all fed up with all kinds of things all the time. But it's OK as long as we don't break the law and do stupid shit.

[Anonymous No.13128502]

>>13128490
Not being able to wear your Hitler t-shirt is unconscionable political oppression but millions just have to tolerate being second class citizens

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » mxvabIoSIE No.13128513]

>>13128457
>US public opinion

burger good
capitalism good
war in middle east good
russia bad
china bad
iran bad
israel good

thats literally all the depth and nuance to "US public opinion"

[Anonymous No.13128523]

>>13128502
>millions just have to tolerate being second class citizens
No. They can migrate and/or make their own countries where they live as kings for all I care. Nobody forced them to come here.

[Anonymous No.13128534]

>>13126141
Sure, Chapofags and the 'dirtbag left' can 'own' shitlib boomers, because that's literally the fucking easiest thing to do. they are really not much different from their nemesis the hillary winemom fluent in sarcasm, it's just a question of degree. 'snark' is a sign of weakness, I am not afraid to destroy my enemies, I don't believe in civility, if you are against me I will destroy you. Dude I'm 18 years old, chapos are boomers to me, an embarrassment, bunch of shutin queers and discord trannies that won't go out of their homes due to crippling anxiety, who repeat the same three degenerated non problematic post SA-speak formulas from the mid 00s over and over again over and over again. you have rendered yourself inoffensive. I am NS, I consider myself a revolutionary, and many young white men of my generation are waking up to the NS

[Anonymous No.13128552]

>>13128534
>I am not afraid to destroy my enemies. I am not interested in civility, if you are against me I will destroy you.

[Anonymous No.13128561]

>>13128513
Unexpectedly based

[Anonymous No.13128575]

>>13128513
Who doesnt actually like a nice burger though?

[Anonymous No.13128589]

>>13126141
extremists on all sides deserve nothing less than death

come to the center and achieve balance along with excellent book sales

[Anonymous No.13128599]

>>13128589
Its all just fucking inane internet larping, its fucking worthless put up or stfu

[Anonymous No.13128600]

>>13128513
all of these are unironically pretty based opinions

[Anonymous No.13128609]

>>13128600
Is neo-liberalism the ultimate redpill?

[Anonymous No.13128617]

>>13128534
If this isn’t a pasta already it should be

[Anonymous No.13128620]

>>13128407
>Peaceful ethnic cleansing
This is nothing more than the bizarre result of fascism arising out in neoliberal society.

[Anonymous No.13128634]

>>13128457
>Actually the average burger isn't a complete retard and 'common sense' ideology based on the intellect of the average burger is good actually.
Incorrect.

[Anonymous No.13128646]

>>13128609
take the kojeve pill. history ended when Hegel wrote the phenomenology. there is a reason macron wrote his theses on kojeve

[Anonymous No.13128655]

>>13128620
It's 2019. I think we can be fascists without being assholes.

[Anonymous No.13128661]

>>13128655
the smoothbrain on this lad is nothing short of astounding

[Anonymous No.13128670]

>>13128655
Based and nicepilled

[Anonymous No.13128678]

>>13128129
Point taken, but there are counter examples. Vermeule at Harvard isn’t fascist, but he’s pretty far out on the right. I guess he did get tenure before going ultra-ultramontane though, and he still catches a lot of shit.

[Anonymous No.13128681]

>>13128655
they just lack imagination

[Anonymous No.13128686]

>>13128011
extremely based and incredibly redpilled

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » mxvabIoSIE No.13128694]

>>13128534
so cringe its fucking based. story of my life

[Anonymous No.13128702]

>>13128182
Stalin and Mao objectively killed more and caused more human misery.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » mxvabIoSIE No.13128704]

>>13128600
no they arent

[Anonymous No.13128713]

>>13128265
Bud almost everyone knew you were a retard when you showed Marxist affinity. You didn’t need to openly flaunt it.

[Anonymous No.13128715]

>>13128702
Judging by all the 'my daddy lived under commulism wwaaaaah...' bullshit they didn't kill enough.

[Anonymous No.13128722]

>>13128534
quite possibly the most homosexual thing ever posted on this site

[Anonymous No.13128723]

>>13128715
That is my main complaint about the holocaust too

[Anonymous No.13128729]

>>13128715
Then shut the fuck up with the appeal to morality. We can tell you are one of the chapo faggots. They ALWAYS show up whenever mentioned. It’s pretty pathetic.

[Anonymous No.13128734]

>>13128704
name one of those opinions which is incorrect

[Anonymous No.13128739]

>>13128702
>17293739 GAZTRILLION

[Anonymous No.13128747]

>>13128715
True fascist aryan black sun family will win because we are amoral nietszchean ubermenschen who bridge the gap truth and untruth with fullscale no holds barred brutality

[Anonymous No.13128750]

>>13128513
>citation needed

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » mxvabIoSIE No.13128757]

>>13128715
it's such a disgusting meme probably perpetrated by the progeny of balkan/ukrainian diaspora who were likely literal fascists and criminal aides of nazi germany.
>nooo we wuz opppressed under gommunism CIA nigger global reterritorialization is so much better
literally no one who actually lived in the USSR believes this unless they're now on the payroll of US intelligence (think irving kristol, gary kasparov, etc)
>>13128734
china russia and iran are based as fuck. israel can suck my dick. capitalism can be good but it can also be bad and right now it's shitty and gay. burgers are a very good meal though i agree

[Anonymous No.13128758]

>>13128729
Anon can I lick your asshole I promise I won’t tell daddy Hitler it can stay between us

[Anonymous No.13128778]

>>13128739
> to 1
What are your chances of getting laid

[Anonymous No.13128786]

>>13128681
I get what you're saying (probably), but we are where we are. Most people can't even process current mainstream politics. So there's a desire to keep it simple.

[Anonymous No.13128798]

>>13128758
Oh hey it’s a far slob chapo guy! He used profanity! You’re super shocking!
Dude, you would shit your pants in a real confrontation. It’s so pathetic how you desperately seek out threads. Kinda like your nigger porn fetish. Of course if I had a father like yours I would project too.

[Anonymous No.13128804]

>>13128758
You are so funny my dude
Wow, you are just a freaking hoot
It's like south park but even more messed up x)

[Anonymous No.13128808]

>>13128729
>All forms of violence are the exact same.
Literally the love child of liberalism and fascism.
>>13128747
>We are amoral Nietzscheans who also hold to a large metanarative uplifting one 'race', which is in itself a vague construct created to serve a certain narrative, and see no dissonance between these things.
Retard.
>>13128757
Based schizo butterfly.

[Anonymous No.13128810]

>>13128702

lol i posted it again

[Anonymous No.13128812]

>>13128798
Please let me lick your asshole I’m begging you we can let my boyfriend watch

[Anonymous No.13128821]

>>13128804
Can I lick your asshole

[Anonymous No.13128827]

>>13128808
> some horrible murders are okay if it shares my ideology
This level of sophistry fits a flubby chapo cuck who thinks using some scatalogical term is super shocking and crazy. Your little parent rage is soooo sweet. You’ll get back at them one day, buddy!

[Anonymous No.13128837]

>>13128808
What’s a
>metanarative
Retard?

[Anonymous No.13128839]

Disgusting chapocel stop posting this shitty book for Starbuck socialists. You haven't experienced a day of struggle in your life much less the consequences of living in a failed socialist experiment. Have sex and kill yourself after

[Anonymous No.13128845]

>>13128812
Haha! It’s just like rick and morty, bro!

[Anonymous No.13128848]

>>13128827
Please let me lick your filthy asshole while you bootstomp on my cock and balls with swastikas in the heel

[Anonymous No.13128858]

>>13128845
I can lick your asshole while you watch tv if you want

[Anonymous No.13128860]

>>13128011

[Anonymous No.13128864]

>>13128839
Can I slurp up the filth from your sweaty crack

[Anonymous No.13128879]

>>13128864
>>13128858
>>13128848
>>13128812
>>13128758
Imagine thinking this is some kind of power move.

[Anonymous No.13128880]

>>13128808
I don't give a shit about the white race as it currently exists, 'western civilisation' has been irrevocably corrupted by semitic slave morality. you are a christian, christ was the original sjw the god of the weak. there are not even 10000 purebreed aryans living in the continental united states of america, In order to establish the imperium and take NS to the stars, we WILL have to engage in a brutal program of culling and eugenics we WILL destroy every last trace of christian influence so the faustian-luciferian core of the west can emerge like a phoenix from the ashes. We WILL replace the false values of mercy, charity and turning the other cheek for the true aryan values that are Honour, Power and Brutality.

[Anonymous No.13128893]

>>13128879
I love dominant right wing men I love licking their assholes please tell me I’m a cuck it gets me so hard

[Anonymous No.13128896]

>>13128880

Somebody has been watching too much anime.

[Anonymous No.13128899]

>>13128880
>purebreed
Isn’t this from Harry Potter?

[Anonymous No.13128936]

>>13126524
I remember this book being kind of funny.

[Anonymous No.13128948]

>>13128880
Why did you capitalize?

[Anonymous No.13128956]

>>13127900
Bernie wouldn've won.
People forget that most americans aren't hip newyorkers and are actually still afraid of the word socialism

[Anonymous No.13129001]

>>13128230
But that's literally correct

[Anonymous No.13129011]

>>13128292
This post radiates chapo tranny energy

[Anonymous No.13129031]

>>13128880
We WILL larp harder than everyone has before, we WILL capitalise the word WILL, we WILL never get laid. Buzzword, Adjective and Capitalisation.

[Anonymous No.13129035]

>>13128265
You are dumb as fuck, my man. If you do not see that ideologies which are considered far left are treated much more lightly than ones which are considered far right, you are dumb as fuck. As an aside I would say that this indicates that far right ideologies present much more of an existential threat to liberalism than those of the left these days. On, say, NPR far lefties when they are spoken of get treated as naive idealists at worst. Nevermind the fact that anarchism and communism could very well spell the extermination of large groups of people if implemented. The farms and factories won't collectivize themselves, after all.

[Anonymous No.13129038]

Is chapo humor still stuck in the say really gay stuff irony phase? Sad!

[Anonymous No.13129048]

>>13129035
This is not an endorsement of either left or right paths, by the way. I do find liberalism repugnant but I am pessimistic that alternatives are possible.

[Anonymous No.13129059]

>>13128470
It really speaks to the situation when someone on an anime imageboard has higher ground than twitter marxists

[Anonymous No.13129063]

>>13128434
wtf this is also me

[Anonymous No.13129069]

>>13128117
>>13128158
the nazi's were worse than the soviets,
>worse in their views
>worse in the carnage those views caused.
etc. etc.

[Anonymous No.13129076]

>>13128552
love that he has a commie beret and right is photoshopped in their

[Anonymous No.13129089]

>>13129069
>the nazi's were worse than the soviets,
>worse in their views

nah

[Anonymous No.13129120]

>>13128848
>mom I said poopy fuck shit again! Pay attention mom! I hate you and dad so much - semen shit fucky shit!

[Anonymous No.13129122]

>>13126141
Last week as I was driving home from work in my 2016 subaru outback I tuned in to NPR to listen to the latest episode of Chapo Trap House. But something strange happened, runes started flashing before my eyes, I had to pull over to the side of the road as the call of the blood, the vengeance of my ancestors overwhelmed me. I have since adopted far right political views and I encourage every one else to do the same.

[Anonymous No.13129128]

>>13129076
they want to claim those legs as their own those right-wing trannies

[Anonymous No.13129135]

>>13129122
Look out, he’s going to threaten to lick your asshole. He’s pretty shocking today. Not as shocking as the flab roll they all have from inactivity, but still.

[Anonymous No.13129146]

>>13129069
What the Nazis and Soviets has in common was an millenarian impulse: that a time was coming where man would be reborn, and everything would be different.
Bound up in the rhetoric of progress, both movements sought a man-made millennium: be it by ushering in the 1000 year Reich and using the power of science to create the perfect race, or the violent revolution leading to a classless society, a new eden, both unwittingly pilfered concepts from the early, radical reformation. Liberalism shares astonishing similarities.

[Anonymous No.13129176]

>>13128117
You will never get an honest response to this, the left always has this jewy deception of denying their own power.
Which is just as fine, because they're pushing otherwise normal people to the other extreme.

[Anonymous No.13129178]

>>13129146
liberalism is the endless deferral of the millenium- Kant's theory of progress, katehon as asymptote. the only thing left for us would be rebels is to tune in to the apocalypse frequency , antihumanist revolution beyond christian socialist eschatology, what was glimpsed vaguely in the terror 1793, the purges of 37 the Khmer Rouge, and Mao's GPRC, revolution not as a goal directed political activity but as an irruption of inhumanism

[Anonymous No.13129182]

>>13128292
>dude
>trying this hard to act ironic and detached
get off this board

[Anonymous No.13129200]

>>13129182
What’s hilarious is it is the literal Chapo guys, and their schtick is so hopelessly dated they end up looking more pathetic than boomers.
> I told this guy on 4chan to felch a baby!
Fucking diseased worms. Haha

[Anonymous No.13129206]

>>13126141
Stop shilling this garbage here please thanks

[Anonymous No.13129226]

cum town > all

[Anonymous No.13129227]

>>13126141
Becauase "the ascendant Left" is made up of teenagers and 20-somethings whose idea of political involvement revolves around donating, but not actually voting.

"The youth vote" is fool's gold. Everyone since McGovern's been chasing it, but no one's been able to turn out young people to swing elections.

[Anonymous No.13129234]

>>13129035
>NPR
>far left
I was considering your point till I read that

[Anonymous No.13129243]

>>13129178
That doesn’t sound any better.

[Anonymous No.13129249]

>>13129035
>>13129038
>>13129059
>>13129076
>>13129120
>>13129122
>>13129128
>>13129200
Please let me lick your assholes

[Anonymous No.13129252]

>>13129234
I did not say that NPR is far left. They are quite firmly liberal with make believe socjus window dressing. I was saying that when NPR discusses far leftists... etc

[Anonymous No.13129270]

>>13129252
Point taken. I think there’s a distinction to be made though. Sure, no candidate can say “I’m a democratic fascist” and garner applause, but the Republican Party is much further right than the Dem establishment (or hell even the DSA) is further left and holds much more power. The few organized ultraleft political outfits in this country hold a fraction of the influence of the Heritage Foundation or something similar

[Anonymous No.13129272]

>>13129200
Why the fuck do you reply to them? Whatever happened to don't feed the troll?

[Anonymous No.13129289]

>>13126141
I'm going to vote Bernie and then third party again.

[Anonymous No.13129315]

>>13129243
the most radical idea: the apocalypse already happened. the power of science creates and destroys the new race every day, i die and i am reborn every instant, we have cycle back to the pre-adamic, this is the garden of eden, I am beyond sin, the namer and the un-namer.

[Anonymous No.13129325]

>>13129315
Isn’t this just Gnosticism? Still haven’t escaped Christian heresies.

[Anonymous No.13129327]

>>13129069
How were the Nazis worse in their views?

[Anonymous No.13129336]

>>13129327
hey can I lick your ass

[Anonymous No.13129356]

>>13129270
I guess that depends on how you slice your political spectra. In my view neither the DNC or GOP are very far from eachother or the "center." They both tend to want neoliberal globalization, deterritorialization/reduction of humanity to a liquid commodity. They differ on some of the garnish but the meal is same. The only difference which is near fundamental is the implementation.

[Anonymous No.13129378]

>>13129327
Because they didn't respect trannies

[Anonymous No.13129388]

>>13129378
I highly doubt the commies of old respected bourgeois debauchery

[Anonymous No.13129456]

>>13129327
If you're at the point where you're uncritically equating Soviets with Nazis you're already lost.

[Anonymous No.13129467]

>>13128837
Maybe you should actually read Nietzsche before you go on about how he'd approve of your racial superiority bs.

[Anonymous No.13129482]

>>13129456
why do you guys think just stating things is an argument

[Anonymous No.13129517]

>>13129456
Will you answer the question please?

[Anonymous No.13129519]

>>13129482
>'Just stating things'
>A bad faith question.
>These are the same thing
Bop yourself you sack of shit.

[Anonymous No.13129524]

>>13127140
What’s a chud, other than me for asking?

[Anonymous No.13129526]

>>13129456
>wow! you think THAT?!
>I just- I can't even- wow
>oh sweetie, oh wow, sweetie, I just, wow
hey you should kill yourself

[Anonymous No.13129531]

>>13129519
you're supposed to say 'you shouldnt equate them because reason x and y'

this is like 5th grade debate information for you

[Anonymous No.13129534]

>>13129517
>>13129482
How about this, you can choose to not be a property owner and/or a fascist anymore. You cannot suddenly stop being of Jewish or whatever else ethnicity you guys consider 'inferior'.

[Anonymous No.13129537]

>>13129531
>Please debate me despite the fact that I'm clearly debating in bad faith
Commit suicide you propertyles loser.

[Anonymous No.13129539]

>>13129534
The Soviets murdered millions of people for a variety of reasons, not because they 'refused to stop being property owners'

[Anonymous No.13129542]

>>13129534
Again, can you answer the question so we can discuss ideas seriously? Tell me what you believe are the core ideas of national socialism.

[Anonymous No.13129546]

>>13129537
Is 'bad faith' code for 'i find this question undermines my unexamined beliefs so Im going to refuse to answer it'?

[The Nomad !N8Yn.I/WbM No.13129547]

>>13128194
Based

[Anonymous No.13129551]

>>13129519
How is my question in bad faith? If anything bad faith is replying with a shitpost instead of discussing it.

[Anonymous No.13129553]

>>13129456
lel either the soviets deliberately killed more than hitler or they were so incompetent that they managed to cause mass starvations after the 2nd agriculture revolution. the russians would have been better of with a hindu or an irishmen in chargel

[The Nomad !N8Yn.I/WbM No.13129566]

>>13128330
He doesn’t
>>13128318
>intentionally missing the point this hard

[Anonymous No.13129568]

>>13129249
It will work bud, just keep trying.

[Anonymous No.13129571]

>>13128534
Unironically based.
Chapo types make such a big show about their leet irony and stupid middle school annoyance, when you can just call them fucking nigger cuck retards and “epically own them” fifty times better than their inoffensive forced dril wannabe garbage “humor” ever could.
>my dude ur corncobbing so hard right now, did u poopoo in your diaper?? wtf did you just say hitler did nothing wrong?? get rekt maga chud, reported for hate speech btw :)))
What kind of adult thinks that shit is funny?

[Anonymous No.13129574]

>>13129546
Yes

[Anonymous No.13129575]

>>13129272
Because they aren’t “trolls” they are dogs I like to kick and remind them where they are in the order of things

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » mxvabIoSIE No.13129579]

>>13129539
>The Soviets murdered millions of people for a variety of reasons

name one

[The Nomad !N8Yn.I/WbM No.13129580]

>>13128432
>if you aren’t as much of a radical as I am go fuck yourself

[Anonymous No.13129582]

>>13129336
>Lik mai butt
> dis mak dedy mad!

[Anonymous No.13129583]

>>13128936
Some of the stuff like the Habbo picture were neat to look at.

[The Nomad !N8Yn.I/WbM No.13129590]

>>13128534
Cringe but redpilled

[Anonymous No.13129591]

>>13129575
Yeah but they're BDSM dogs that enjoy getting kicked because they're fucked in the head

[Anonymous No.13129597]

>>13129579
>what are the purges?
>who was lavrenty beria?
>what are famines in the ukrain/kazahkstan/volga regions?
murder apologists pls leave

[The Nomad !N8Yn.I/WbM No.13129598]

>>13128702
This is true

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » mxvabIoSIE No.13129601]

I ate catshit out of desperation last night guys. I had picked enough cans up to buy food but had to post on lit about the labor value theory.

[Anonymous No.13129646]

>>13129537
based. I’m not even a leftist and I think it’s obvious fascists never debate in good faith, ever

[Anonymous No.13129658]

>>13129646
Let's try then. I wouldn't say I'm a fascist but I'm getting close. So care to answer my question?

[Anonymous No.13129660]

>>13129551
>How is my question in bad faith?

Internet leftists use the "HE'S ARGUING IN BAD FAITH" dodge all the time.

Every time they get frumpled by a question that puts them on the stand, they short circuit and immediately accuse the other party of being a disingenuous meanie. It's just a rhetorical trick - like shouting "racist!" or "homophobe!" or whatever.

[Anonymous No.13129667]

>>13129456
Not an argument.

[Anonymous No.13129669]

>>13129571
To an extent you have to admit it works on most right-wing types. Chapofags figures out that Ben Shapiro and his ilk never want an intellectual debate, they just want infotainment one-liners. These people go absolutely batshit when Chapofags refuse to take them seriously. It worked back when most of the online right rallied around a fucking frog and unironically called people cucks. It’s not quite as effective now, and especially doesn’t work when it’s 1 vs a bunch like that guy who wants to lick everyone’s ass , but it still works for the majority. You can’t have a “spirited debate about Holocaust truth” or whatever when the other guy keeps asking you to fuck his wife

[Anonymous No.13129676]

>>13129575
don’t cut yourself on all that edge, stormtrooper

[Anonymous No.13129677]

>>13129660
So far the only bad faith posting in this thread has been some dude replying "lol use another shirt" like 10 times, instead of addressing the other anon's argument.

[Anonymous No.13129686]

>>13129658
>>13129660
Going to respond to both of you. I think it’s because leftists see certain beliefs as unquestionable - for example, universal human rights - which fascists often see as up for debate. Leftists don’t like arguing with fascists because they refuse to use the same first principles. Imagine having an argument with someone about how best to (I don’t fucking know) roof a house or whatever, but then the other guy says that triangles have four sides. (Applies to both left and right.)

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » mxvabIoSIE No.13129691]

>>13129597
>kulaks get dabbed on epic style
>this is a bad thing

christards leave my board please

[Anonymous No.13129701]

>>13129660
>>13129658
Nazi's were either culling parts of the population in cold blood out of a nihilist need to gain or hang onto power, or they really did do it out of a belief that doing that was right. The deaths in the Soviet Union were a mix of bad luck with droughts, and a crazy leader fighting elements within his country that threatened his power. Note that the Soviet causes of civilian deaths were not a required ideological requirement of Marxism in any of its writings, where the Nazis were doing these things in a time and place where they could afford not to but decided to proceed anyway, it wasn't Hitler having a breakdown from day 1 but by design. If you claim that you aren't arguing in bad faith, I find that hard to believe because it just shows you blindly pointing out these things that happened like they are arguments, but somehow you are too dumb to consider WHY they happened and why they may not be equivalent.

[Anonymous No.13129718]

>>13128513
burgers are based

[Anonymous No.13129723]

>>13129691
>saying stupid shit about hypercubes in one thread
>saying stupid shit about kulaks in another
all in a days work for a 14 year old tripfaggot huh?

[Anonymous No.13129729]

>>13129686
I get you, though I think universal human rights is closer to liberalism than communism. Either way, lately this has manifested more and more in rights for some groups, not so much for others, but in a suicidal way that results in essentially crippling yourself and giving advantages for the outer group. It's very weird.

>>13129701
I was asking about their views, not the result. But you told me I asked in bad faith and then you say "bad: the nazis killed for power, good: the soviets killed for power + as a result of their extremely inefficient system".

[Anonymous No.13129732]

>>13126141

I'm unironically voting for Bernie despite not believing in the American election system.

[Anonymous No.13129738]

>>13129701
>The deaths in the Soviet Union were a mix of bad luck with droughts, and a crazy leader fighting elements within his country that threatened his power

Yes, all 20 millions deaths were unfortunate accidents.

We will do better next time comrades.

[Anonymous No.13129739]

[OP No.13129745]

>>13127195
Okay.

[Anonymous No.13129754]

>>13129701
>culling parts of the population in cold blood

What the hell was the Cheka doing then? Handing out blini and candy canes?

[Anonymous No.13129759]

[Anonymous No.13129763]

>>13129729
>>13129738
That sttill does not equate to choosing to kill as the nazi's did, when they basically never had to. The droughts would have killed people whether the czars were still in power or not at that time, but the nazi's deaths didn't happen IN SPITE of fascism, they happened BECAUSE of fascism, and that is the difference. Now you are arguing in bad faith, and are just being obtuse because you can't handle that point in an argument.

[Anonymous No.13129775]

>>13129759
>unironically talking about throwing children into reeducation programs to nullify subversive emotions and ultimately mentally castrate them with imposed mental illness
ha ha the left is so funy ha ha

[Anonymous No.13129778]

>>13129763
Don't argue with fascists, just tell them to suck their nannies tits and fuck off.

[Anonymous No.13129781]

>>13129729
>not so much for others
How does another group gaining the rights you already had equal you being oppressed?

[Anonymous No.13129782]

>>13129775
way to react to that like a pearl clutching boomer who can't detect irony

[Anonymous No.13129786]

>>13129763
Again with the bad faith argument and again with pretending the soviets didn't kill as they needed? Come on m8
And again, I'm asking more about the theory in either doctrine.

[Anonymous No.13129787]

>>13129775
>probably unironically supports ethnic cleansing
ok

[Anonymous No.13129788]

>>13129781
>I NEED race based endowments and laws designed to encompass criminal behavior
>that way we'll be equal
nice try, shlomo

[Anonymous No.13129792]

>>13129778
because you lose every argument lmao, go suck off a fat tranny

[Anonymous No.13129794]

>>13129763
All overtly Communist regimes have been party to mass murder on the order of millions since 1917. It seems to be a feature, not a bug.

[Anonymous No.13129798]

>>13129786
not a counterargument

[Anonymous No.13129802]

>>13129763
>Hitler killed because he was a big meanie!
>Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin killed for the good of the people!

Stop huffing your own jenkem gas.

[Anonymous No.13129804]

>>13129763
Nothing about fascism says you have to commit mass murder actually, you won't find that in the Doctrine of Fascism anymore than you'll find it in Das Kapital

[Anonymous No.13129805]

>>13129782
irony is a poison

>>13129787
why did you infer this from a post explicitly condemning reeducation camps? stop projecting and we could have a pretty neat convo buddy

[Anonymous No.13129809]

>>13129786
That’s the thing. No part of Leninism hinged on the utter and complete extermination of an entire ethnic group as part of its core theory. Moral/sexual/racial purity is a defining pillar of fascism. Did the Russian Revolution kill millions? Absolutely. That’s just objective fact. Did they do it to exterminate the gay black Jews to rid themselves of faggot degeneracy? No. Pretending like ML and fascism are morally indistinguishable is pure folly.

[Anonymous No.13129812]

>>13129798
Will you discuss the theory with me anon? Or ignore what I'm asking for since 10 posts ago?

[Anonymous No.13129818]

>>13129809
Yeah fascism is actually morally superior to ML since the groups it targeted are objectively much worse than 'people who own stuff'. That's leaving aside that the Soviets did in fact target people by ethnicity

[Anonymous No.13129821]

>>13129792
There is no argument to be lost because there is no honest arguing with a fascist. Now go suck on your nan's oozing fluffy tit.

[Anonymous No.13129822]

>>13129809
not that anon but what if you have sufficient reason to believe that the soviet proletarian vanguard were literally just duping a bunch of poor backwards russian peasants into giving them ultimate and unchecked power.
it's not a defense of fascists, but it definitely washes away this presumed excuse the soviets seem to get that "they had such good intentions"

[Anonymous No.13129824]

>>13129788
>I wouldn’t be a neet if it wasn’t for the tranny jews corrupting America
Ok anon

[Anonymous No.13129825]

>>13129821
youre pathetic, get raped by your pet nigger

[Anonymous No.13129829]

>>13129822
>They were tricked into getting out of serfdom, poor bastards.
Wut

[Anonymous No.13129831]

[Anonymous No.13129832]

>>13129809
It hinges on the extermination of the upper classes. As far as I know, fascism per se doesn't necessarily have to do with ethnicity, and national socialism itself doesn't necessitate the extermination of the Jews, only their expulsion, for example Hitler asking the allied nations to take Jews and nobody taking them in, or the Haavara agreement.
What's inherently wrong about moral, sexual and racial purity in your view? This in itself doesn't require the extermination of anyone who doesn't adhere to it.

[Anonymous No.13129833]

>>13129824
>can;t argue without projecting cliches
nigger I run my own business and employ illegal immigrants. you don;t know jack shit about me so why don't oyu reply to my posts and not the imaginary strawman you wish I was

[Anonymous No.13129834]

>>13129824
Just like the vast majority of blacks wouldnt be criminal neets if only evil yt wasnt around right

like in their paradises in africa

[Anonymous No.13129835]

>>13126141
Average people are too smart to know that offering people free shit so you can have your 'burn the system down' moment is not worth it.

Average people don't believe big promises anymore. They see right through it and they know they will be caught in the social engineering collateral damage, whether it's war or economics or healthcare. The rage machine is starting to crack. People see through it.

[Anonymous No.13129837]

>americans talk about socialism

[Anonymous No.13129838]

>>13129822
If that’s true (which I don’t think it is) that’s unfortunate. It doesn’t change the substance of what I said though.

[Anonymous No.13129839]

>>13129809
>Moral/sexual/racial purity is a defining pillar of fascism.

Well, at least we've finally gotten you to confess the heart of your argument.

"Fascists are worse because they're nasty racists!"

[Anonymous No.13129840]

>>13129829
>out of serfdom and into conscripted labor and starvation
oh lucky them; definitely not duped

[Anonymous No.13129842]

>>13126141
Would've fired better if Cum Town wrote it

[Anonymous No.13129844]

>>13129833
>employs illegals
>wants every non-white deported
>so mad he can’t type
kek

[Anonymous No.13129846]

>>13129838
>Pretending like ML and fascism are morally indistinguishable is pure folly.
it directly address this assumption- albeit maybe not with a clear answer
who's worse? the sincere monster or the lying ruler? I may not know but it surely isn't folly to ask

[Anonymous No.13129848]

>>13129839
See what >>13129686 anon said. Any hope of dialogue between us has now ended because we disagree on first principles. I think everyone has human rights. You don’t. It was nice talking with you comrade

[Anonymous No.13129850]

>>13129781
If you're denying the open animosity towards whites, heterosexuals and males in the Anglo world I don't know what to tell you.

[Anonymous No.13129851]

>>13129844
>still talking to a magatard strawman
lol k

[Anonymous No.13129852]

>>13129701
Now this is gaslighting

[Anonymous No.13129855]

>>13126141
because there are far fewer "Bernie bros" than poor minorities who want freebies.

guess which demographic the Dems need to win

[Anonymous No.13129857]

>>13129846
>the sincere monster

I think it's arguable that Bolsheviks like Trotsky held a legitimate hatred for ethnic Russians and the practicing Orthodox. He was a very sincere monster.

[Anonymous No.13129863]

>>13129809
>It's okay to exterminate groups of people as long as it's not because of their ethnicity

[Anonymous No.13129864]

HAHAHA LIKE YEAH GUYS PC HAS GONE WAYYYY TOO FAR AND THE DEMOCRATIC PROBLEMS ARE OVERWHELMING SO LIKE LETS ALL BURP AND FART INTO THE MIC AND SAY A FEW BAD WORDS BUT ALSO IF YOU DONT LET TRANNIES GAPE YOUR ASSHOLE YOURE JUST A HOMOPHOBIC PIECE OF SHITTT!!! WHA WHA WHATTT?!! LIKE NO MAN WE ARENT THE MIRROR IMAGE OF RIGHT WING YOUTUBE HUHHUCK BUSTER YOURE ON ONE TODAY I TELL YA!!! YEAH WE TOTALLY DESTROYED BEN SHAPIROS BOOK BECAUSE HE WASNT WRITING TO HIS AUDIENCE HE WAS MAKING 100% LITERAL STATEMENTS LIKE WHAT OFCOURSE WE TALKED ABOUT IT FOR THREE HOURS BECAUSE IT MIGHT SEEM LIKE TRITE POP POLITICS BUT REALLY ITS A TREATISE ON HOW TO BE A DIRTY CAPITALIST PIG MANNNNN, HUHUCK AYE PUT THAT SLICE OF PIZZA DOWN BUSTER ITS MINE ALSO DONT SAY THE WORD FAGGOT OR ILL KICK YOUR ASS HUHUCK

[Anonymous No.13129865]

>>13129701

[Anonymous No.13129867]

>>13129832
Fascism does, objectively, have to do with racial purity. Hitler and Mussolini gave numerous speeches emphasizing their country’s racial origins, they prohibited art that didn’t depict whites, etc etc. I sense we’re coming to an impasse here - I think that denying someone human rights is objectively wrong, always. (Like I don’t support Mao killing all the landlords.) If you consider this up for debate for certain types of people, we can’t have a discussion.

[Anonymous No.13129870]

>>13129855
>tfw when you willingly gave up the bright future ensured to you by countless generations of warriors and scholars so that you could feel like the cool white guy in your tenement building
rough

[Anonymous No.13129874]

>>13129864
What - the fuck are you even saying

[Anonymous No.13129875]

>>13129867
>if you disagree with my viewpoint we cant have a discussion
fucking lol at least youre honest

[Anonymous No.13129881]

>talk to leftist friends
>agree that capitalism needs to be stopped
>agree that at this very second capitalism is closing its metal skeleton hand around the already wounded heart of humanity for the final squeeze followed by an eternity of worst hell slavery
>agree that we are in a zero-sum war to the end with capitalism
>ask them if i'm allowed to do anything to stop capitalism
>"No!! That would prevent tranny fag niggers from getting abortions and doing whatever they want all the time with fun iphone video games entertainment systems and infinite rootless labor immigration across all borders. No matter what we do we have to make sure everyone still basically lives the life of a tranny nigger faggot college student who has casual sex and does drugs and hedonistically fritters away all their time, and all national working classes remain confused fluctuating mixtures of miscellaneous easily bought-off niggers who are just glad they aren't in stinky Arab shit smell countries anymore. If ew give these things up, capitalism has already won"

[Anonymous No.13129885]

>>13129848
>I think everyone has human rights.

Like the right to bear arms?
The right to determine the destiny of one's own people?
The right to choose who to let into your country and who to keep out?
Does an unborn baby have human rights?
What about a skinhead racist?
Does he have the right to vote racists into power?

Perkele...

[Anonymous No.13129892]

>>13129848
>I think everyone has human rights

You're an idiot

[Anonymous No.13129896]

>>13129875
I don’t want to debate whether black people are people any more than you want to debate whether or not you should live when someone levels a gun at your head. The answer is obvious - you should live, and you shouldn’t have to argue about it, because the bare fact of your life itself has inherent value. Debating it seems as absurd as debating whether or not a circle is round.

[Anonymous No.13129903]

>>13129867
Again I don't think fascism (not nazism) had necessarily to do with racialism. Do you have links to Mussolini talking about race in the way that Hitler did? Maybe you're right, I'm not denying I'm rather new to this shit.
Aside from that, you're not addressing my points. I didn't say that NS didn't have to do with racial purity, I said that this doesn't necessitate the extermination of anyone. One country for one people, and as long as the others don't bother us we won't bother them, that kind of thing.
Regarding human rights, you don't have to deny them. Saying that you care only for your people doesn't mean you consider others like chattel or less.

[Anonymous No.13129905]

>>13129775
I get a more twisted sense of humor everyday 2years ago I would be a pearl clutching homo about this but reading this gave me a slight chuckle
ive been 100% demoralized

[Anonymous No.13129907]

>>13129896
what you actually don,t want to debate is whether black people are on average different than white people. This topic scares you so much you are literally incapable of even thinking about it properly

Similarly the idea that black people, as a group, don't give a shit about you and will support each other before you, making it very unwise to extend to them empathy they won't reciprocate, is not something you want to think about.

[Anonymous No.13129910]

Why does /lit/ love to keep hate circle jerking about Chapo? I have checked in on /lit/ 3 different times this week and 3 times there’s been some thread sperging out about “stopping them”

At least this thread mentioned the fucking book, the other 2 didn’t even bother to pretend to be on topic

[Anonymous No.13129916]

>>13129885
>yes, everyone has the right to defend themselves
>if one’s own people means your family or immediate community, sure. if it means The White Race, then no. I have nothing in common with you
>countries are illegitimate
>yes, but their mother has bodily autonomy and the baby is within her body. I shouldn’t be able to tell the mother to birth the child any more than I can forcibly remove one of your organs because someone else will die without a transplant.
>yes
>yes, and I have the obligation to stop him

[Anonymous No.13129918]

>>13129848
>doesn't believe in god because lol not real
>believes in spooks like human rights

wew

[Anonymous No.13129919]

>>13129910
probably shilling

[Anonymous No.13129927]

>>13129892
>We are in full agreement that there is no support from the field of population genetics for Wade’s conjectures.
ok

[Anonymous No.13129933]

>>13129918
Lmao

[Anonymous No.13129934]

>>13129916
>if it means The White Race, then no. I have nothing in common with you
Why couldn't one find himself closer to others of his own ethnic group? Do you believe the same applies to blacks, Jews, Asians etc.?
>countries are illegitimate
How so?

[Anonymous No.13129942]

>>13129927
cringe and yikes!

[Anonymous No.13129943]

>>13129907
It doesn’t matter. If you think blacks are inferior to whites, and you believe that an infant has rights, you must extend that belief to black people. After all infants have none of the physical or cognitive abilities of adults and I assume you’re against killing babies. Inherent worth doesn’t come from utility.

[Anonymous No.13129945]

>>13129916
Oh, so human rights begin and end where YOU decide.

I understand, comrade. May you lead us to glorious revolution.

[Anonymous No.13129950]

>>13129942
...isn’t that the book that steamrollered The Bell Curve?

[Anonymous No.13129951]

>>13129927
https://parallaxoptics.wordpress.com/2019/01/15/on-race/ here's a good and concise article on the topic

[Anonymous No.13129958]

>>13129934
You could find yourself closer to other whites, but that doesn’t imply that your group is objectively better any more than me liking vanilla ice cream makes chocolate utter shit. Why do you think that liking something gives it independent value?
>how so?
Lines drawn on paper. Do you think America should be an all white nation, even when its “ethnic forebears” were Indians?

[Anonymous No.13129962]

>>13129943
>Inherent worth doesn’t come from utility.

I can picture some fat communist slob telling this to his roommates when they ask for his share of the rent.

[Anonymous No.13129963]

>>13129951
>arguing with Stanford, the best uni in the world, from a Wordpress blog
Right

[Anonymous No.13129967]

>>13129962
Not an argument.

[Anonymous No.13129971]

>>13129943
I have no problem with universal negative rights, and my own instinctive sense of morality leads exactly to that. But there are no libertarian countries and never will be, and racial diversity in a country does nothing but cause conflict and mistrust.

[Anonymous No.13129983]

>>13129943
>If you think blacks are inferior to whites, and you believe that an infant has rights, you must extend that belief to black people. After all infants have none of the physical or cognitive abilities of adults and I assume you’re against killing babies

Leftists sure do love shitty analogies.

>"Heh, penises and clitorises came from the same rudimentary organ, so it's not gay that I suck dicks."

Wew, you got us.

Anyway, a white baby might grow up to be a contributor to society, but that niglet, at best, is going to be a manager at Denny's.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » mxvabIoSIE No.13129989]

>>13129962
communism is absolute peak utility slavery you buglet

[Anonymous No.13129995]

>>13129983
Please explain how the analogy is shitty. Your position seems to be that black people don’t have rights, or have lesser rights, because they’re inferior to whites. If infants have rights, and infants cannot do any of the things that a grown adult can do, then it must mean that rights come from someplace other than sheer utility. I don’t see how you’re able to argue against this unless you 1. claim nonwhites aren’t human (objectively wrong) or 2. argue against infants having rights

[Anonymous No.13129997]

>>13129963
An appeal to authority so you don't have to read counterarguments? Really mate?

>>13129958
>but that doesn’t imply that your group is objectively better
Who said it does? Just take the metaphor of a family. You put your family above all others and prefer being with them, that doesn't mean you necessarily vye for the destruction of those.
>Lines drawn on paper
That's reductionist in extreme and ignores the reality of different peoples needing to defend their place in the world.
Regarding America, are you saying the land belongs to Indians or what?

[Anonymous No.13130005]

>>13129971
Again, it doesn’t matter if racial diversity causes conflict. (I believe it doesn’t, and this can be proven, but one thing at a time. Let’s stick to this.) Innate rights means these rights can’t be infringed without breaking a moral law, even if complying with those rights makes life more difficult.

[Anonymous No.13130008]

>>13129950
No lol. It doesn't delve into IQ

[Anonymous No.13130014]

>>13129963
cringe and yikes!

[Anonymous No.13130020]

>>13130005
>it doesn’t matter if racial diversity causes conflict
How can this not matter?
>Innate rights means these rights can’t be infringed without breaking a moral law
I get you, but what law would one break by maintaining the demographics of his land consistent by restricting immigration etc.?

[Anonymous No.13130022]

>>13129995
Your arbitrary list of human rights is utterly immaterial. I have no idea what the fuck you crazy leftists believe nowadays and what you believe you deserve from life. I could list some right that trumps one of your rights, and you would just wag your finger and say "nuh uh, that's not a human right" so why don't you sack up and list what you believe to be the human rights that are woven into the fabric of the universe.

Can't do it? Oh right, that's because you're making them up as you go along since it's more convenient that way.

[Anonymous No.13130028]

>>13130005
No but it means that ethnonationalism is a much better way to found a country. If youre already stuck with a multiracial country(which is in every single instance we have on earth less functional than homogenous white or east asian countries, the same pattern even holds for states and cities) then you can either balkanize or live with your retarded situation and try to cut back on positive rights so it doesn't turn into a low level race war via political party like in much of present day Africa.

[Anonymous No.13130034]

>>13128308
It's all over. You've been memed!

[Anonymous No.13130037]

>>13130005
>it doesn’t matter if racial diversity causes conflict
>I believe it doesn’t

You probably say this because you live in a 99% white neighborhood like all shitlibs.

[Anonymous No.13130042]

>>13129997
It’s incredibly unlikely that a wordpress poster just disproved the world’s top scientists. I wouldn’t be able to beat Michael Phelps in a swimming contest either and I don’t have to race him to find out. He won eight gold medals. Sheer probability. Re: family, I don’t disagree. I feel the same about my family. I feel duty-bound to protect them from threat. Where the trouble lies is interpreting “threat,” and in realizing that I prefer to protect my family, but universal human rights means I have no moral high ground in choosing to save them over someone else. If I had to choose my brother or a stranger to save from a fire I’d pick my brother, but because I prefer my brother, and that doesn’t imply that the other has a lesser right to life. Countries are lines drawn on paper. People defend territories and pieces of land, but “countries” are literal lines on paper. I’m not saying the land “belongs” to anyone. What I’m saying is if your idea of “country” involves a continuous hand-down from ancient culture/race to current culture/race, isn’t the modern state of America illegitimate by your own definition?

[Anonymous No.13130056]

>>13130042
antiracism is the religion of progressives, you can't expect the institutions they run to just come out and be honest about it

Im not saying believe the racists, im saying actually read through what they say and what the mainstream academic says, and see for yourself what is going on

[Anonymous No.13130061]

>>13130022
We can go back and forth about what constitutes a right all day, but discussing the broad concept of “human rights” itself doesn’t mean I have to give you an alphabetized list. I just have to say that humans have rights in this example. For the baby analogy, either you have to say that, again, infants are not human or they don’t have rights. You’ll have to defend either viewpoint.

[Anonymous No.13130066]

this video gets harder and harder to find each time i search for it :^)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtIi8QR5Mzs

[Anonymous No.13130080]

[Anonymous No.13130085]

>>13130028
Anon, no one said honoring everyone’s rights would be easy.

[Anonymous No.13130098]

>>13130020
>racial conflict
Because people have inherent rights. Violating someone’s rights is morally wrong, even if it makes life more difficult.
>restricting immigration
Good question. We’re starting to get into what constitutes a right, which is really hard to define. I don’t think people have an inherent “right” to a given country because I think countries themselves are illegitimate. I think people have an inherent right to free movement. For me, this makes immigration restriction wrong. You’re free to disagree with me. Nailing down rights is hard.

[Anonymous No.13130113]

>>13130061
>discussing the broad concept of “human rights” itself doesn’t mean I have to give you an alphabetized list

It most certainly does. Some rights come into conflict with others, and I'm certain that any "right" I can come up with will be slapped down for not being legitimate.

I say this because I do not think you have any list, nor could you write one because you're afraid of exposing yourself to attack at the most fundamental level of your beliefs. Your "human rights" diatribe is a giant diversionary tactic, so you can pull them out of your asshole like wildcards whenever your argument is in jeopardy.

>I believe that people have the right to protect their own community and borders.
>"Oh, well, everyone has the human right to a safe home and food and free iPods and malt liquor. Enjoy your Somalian immigrants, you fucking racist."

Put up or shut up.

[Anonymous No.13130119]

>>13130042
>It’s incredibly unlikely that a wordpress poster just disproved the world’s top scientists
It's a very short article, it won't lose you much time. You're doing a disservice to yourself by being so dogmatic with knowledge. Scientists (or academics in general), especially with social matters, have their own interests to protect too, so it's worth reading various viewpoints.
>If I had to choose my brother or a stranger to save from a fire I’d pick my brother
So you understand what I'm saying here. I'm not sure how universal rights factors into this, except only as directly detrimental to your own (you and your people's) survival.
>Countries are lines drawn on paper
Yes and no, the composition of a country's population isn't arbitrary, there is a certain history, values, etc. uniting them, and the less this is true the more strain there is. Just look at ex-colonies where the imperial country left and drew arbitrary lines, creating at least decades of conflict from that. Or examples like India.
>isn’t the modern state of America illegitimate by your own definition?
This is a good question and something that I'd like to debate more. Certainly, a Europe for whites is undeniably legitimate to me, while America is a bit more muddy. What I can say is that, in those times, right of conquest was the rule of law, and it's happened in such a way that Indians are now a minority and whites essentially forged the modern states.
I do not agree that such conquests would be legitimate today.

[Anonymous No.13130126]

>>13130098
>I think people have an inherent right to free movement.

Like into each other's houses?

[Anonymous No.13130143]

>>13130098
Do you not think that a group has the right to live by themselves and exclude others from their community?

[Anonymous No.13130154]

>>13128117
>Flying the Soviet flag doesn't get you in shit, flying the Nazi flag does
this annihilates the marxist doubters

[Anonymous No.13130156]

>>13130113
>some rights come into conflict with others
Yes, you’re right. And we’d probably disagree on what constitutes a human right. But that’s not what we were arguing about. We were debating the idea of rights themselves. To argue about specifics we have to establish whether “human rights” exist. It sounds like you’re trying to shift the argument because you can’t answer my question about infant rights. I’m saying that human babies have rights. For this to be wrong, either babies aren’t human, or people don’t have rights. I’ve heard excellent arguments for both positions. You can bluster and wave all you want, but you’re going to have to address this before we move forward.

[Anonymous No.13130169]

>>13130156
Come up with your list of human rights, and I'll answer your baby question.

[Anonymous No.13130195]

>>13130119
>article
I might read it later, but my point still stands - the chances of it being right are astronomically low.
>brother
I’ll pick my brother because I’m not infallible. In a perfect world, the choice would be impossible. I’d have to flip a coin. Again, no one said human rights was easy.
>countries
India isn’t a great example. It’s far closer to the European Union than somewhere like France. They all speak the same language and have the same religion, but each “state” has its own language, customs, music, etc. Many times a country’s population is somewhat arbitrary. Japan doesn’t speak Korean because a freak typhoon destroyed the invading Korean fleet, for example. Russia wasn’t thought of as part of Europe until the 19th century. Tolstoy’s detractors poked fun at him for being too Eastern. I’m not sure how you apply your argument to any country in the Americas honestly.
>illegitimate
Why wouldn’t conquests be legitimate today? Curious on this one

[Anonymous No.13130197]

>>13130143
>Do you not think that a group has the right to live by themselves and exclude others from their community?

No because borders are imaginary, and humans have right to free movement.

[Anonymous No.13130203]

>>13130143
I don’t know. Maybe. But if they did, that doesn’t mean this group scales up to countries, which I view as illegitimate. I’m fond of my family and my community but I feel no particular affinity with the United States. This is interesting, tricky territory, and we’re bound to disagree.

[Anonymous No.13130210]

>>13130195
>Again, no one said human rights was easy.

False modesty. How cute.

For someone who babbles about how difficult the subject of human rights can be, you sure seem to resort to them a lot to make your arguments.

[Anonymous No.13130211]

>>13130169
The fact of rights themselves comes before delineating those rights. This is as obvious as saying that you must agree triangles exist before you can bicker over the best way to find their area. It’s not that I don’t want to go forward with you, it’s that we can’t if you won’t state your position on the infant question.

[Anonymous No.13130215]

>>13130210
I resort to the concept of rights themselves, yes. I acknowledge that defining a list of rights is very hard. In that post I referred to the concept of rights themselves. I’m starting to think you don’t have much of an argument aside from constant misdirection.

[Anonymous No.13130220]

>>13130022
The left-liberal conception of human rights is rooted in the anthropology of homo economicus. The purpose of all Enlightenment projects, be they classically liberal, progressive, or socialist, has been maximizing the capacity for actualization of the rational, self-choosing self. The problems are manifold. First, that this is not who man actually is, and second, that those who are inconvenient to this maximization, under whatever scheme, are gradually determined to not really be human, and not deserving of rights. Third, the rise of homo economicus has ironically led to a world where everywhere, man’s options seem to be shrinking before him.
None of this is to defend some of the more barbaric opponents of these projects, but we are at a point where we must reject this false anthropology, and try to see the truth.

[Anonymous No.13130236]

>>13130005
>it doesn’t matter if racial diversity causes conflict
it seems to, more often than not

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » mxvabIoSIE No.13130238]

>>13129809
Leninism hinges on killing any and all “counter-revolutionaries” which is anyone that opposes them in any way. Lysenkoism is something that has ONLY happened in a communist country because the ideology is based on denying empirical reality. Hundreds of scientists were killed because they did not agree that wheat could morph into corn. Millions of Germans were murdered after WW2 in Czechoslovakia for no reason other than the communist mindset. Many examples in every communist country. Sorry, bud.

[Anonymous No.13130246]

>>13130211
>>13130215
So you don't have any idea what human rights are, nor do you know what human rights you even believe in?

Maybe you should iron that shit out for yourself first instead of trying to suck people into dumb "gotcha" abortion debates.

[Anonymous No.13130247]

>>13130236
It might. It might not. My argument stands either way.

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » mxvabIoSIE No.13130257]

>>13130247
> people should suffer because of muh feels
This is a perfect encapsulation of a marxist.

[Anonymous No.13130262]

>>13130195
>>the chances of it being right are astronomically low.
But why do you think so? Why do you think only Academia, especially in its ideological homogeneity, has a large chance of being correct to the point you're ready to dismiss dissenting arguments? It's not like I posted a shitty infographic about pure aryans vs niggers.
>In a perfect world, the choice would be impossible
Your perfect world is one where you feel the same way towards everyone? What? Correct me if I'm strawmanning here because that sounds fucking insane. Your human rights input into this area keeps confusing me. How is it that you violate them by choosing your brother over some random pedestrian when it comes to affection and whatever derives from it?
>India isn’t a great example
Exactly, I used it as an example of what a country shouldn't be, because a colonial power left off and drew lines arbitrarily, to illustrate your point that "all borders are arbitrary", when a properly forged country, let's say, won't have such problems if it's a proper nation state (one country for one people).
I don't understand what you mean by talking about Korea and Russia, and regarding America I already replied in the previous post.
>Why wouldn’t conquests be legitimate today? Curious on this one
Well, if I believe countries are only legitimate if they are nation states, then imperial conquest is by definition illegitimate. Note also that expansion into unexplored/uninhabited land is not conquest over other peoples, but this is irrelevant today when we cover all the globe anyway.

[Anonymous No.13130266]

>>13130247
>My argument stands either way.

fraid not friendo

[Anonymous No.13130267]

>>13130246
This isn’t a “gotcha,” this is something we must establish so we don’t talk past each other. You’re not willing to establish the concept of “human rights.” All you’ve done is ridicule and misdirect every time I’ve extended a hand. Again, both of your possible positions in this scenario - that either infants aren’t people or people don’t have rights - are perfectly defensible, I’ve seen intelligent and well-constructed arguments for both, but you must pick one. Again, this isn’t a gotcha. This is foundational. If you aren’t willing we can’t have a discussion about this. I’m sorry, anon.

[Anonymous No.13130282]

>>13130197
>>13130203
What about houses, like he said? Where do you draw the line? If a tight knit group moves into your community and makes trouble because they selfishly vye for their own interestes, do you think you would not be justified in defending the interests of your group, and being more protective in the future so that this doesn't have to happen?
In a less abstract, more animalistic sense, how do you think a group with such universalizing morals like you posit would fare against groups with a very concrete sense of self determination and preservation? (here, also, is where the matter of Jews comes into play)

[Anonymous No.13130284]

>>13130262
>Well, if I believe countries are only legitimate if they are nation states, then imperial conquest is by definition illegitimate
is turkey legitimate?

[Anonymous No.13130291]

>>13130284
Isn't Turkey majority Turk in Anatolia? The only group that wants to secede are the Kurds to my knowledge, might be wrong.

[Anonymous No.13130301]

>>13130267
>You’re not willing to establish the concept of “human rights.”

Neither are you. Just tell me what you think human rights are. Surely, you have an idea?

>W-well let's discus-

NO. Tell me what YOU think. I already have an idea of what I think human rights are, and you seem desperate to hear it, but you seem very reluctant to give your own opinions for whatever reason. If I had to guess, it's that you're terrified of opening up your principles to attack.

You want me to make the first move, and I'm not falling for your dumb abortion debate misdirection.

[Anonymous No.13130302]

>>13130247
you don't have an argument because your beliefs are elementary and horse shit
of course conflicts matter, people die in them but you somehow hold the contradictory position that "conflicts don't matter but human rights are universal" - you can't have human rights if you're dead

can you give two examples of peaceful countries where racial diversity is abundant but everybody also has universal rights?

[Anonymous No.13130308]

>>13130262
>academia is ideologically homogeneous
To an extent. There’s vicious inter-left debate inside most American universities among faculty. The ones who hold power (donors, administrators, presidents, boards) are largely right wing. Yes, on occasion, laymen have proved entire fields wrong. This has happened so incredibly infrequently that I feel confident dismissing his argument sight unseen based on sheer probability. He might be right. It’s far more likely he’s wrong.
>perfect world
I might’ve not been clear. I believe everyone has rights, no matter who they are. In the fire example this means that both my brother and the stranger have an equal right to life. The decision should be utterly impossible, and I should have to flip a coin. Universal rights don’t depend on who gives me the warm fuzzies. But I love my brother so I’d choose him without thinking and I acknowledge that this violates universal rights. At the base: me loving someone doesn’t magically give them more rights.
>India
Interesting. I would argue that the idea of a “properly forged state” is impossible in and of itself. I don’t want to get bogged down in swapping specifics - I’m guessing neither do you - but take Northern Ireland and Ireland, for example. Should NI remain part of the UK or reunify with Ireland? If it’s the second, that calls into question the entire UK. If it’s the first, it appears to imply that countries aren’t quite as simple as one land for one people. My Korea example was to illustrate that a country’s given cultural mileau is often accidental. If Korea’s invasion would have been successful, Japan’s current culture would’ve been drastically different.
>conquest
Interesting. I’ve never heard this one before. I don’t think we have much to talk about because I think nation states themselves are bunk, but thanks for the viewpoint

[Anonymous No.13130316]

>>13130301
We can’t have a discussion. I very clearly laid out why we must establish the question of rights themselves before debating individual rights. You haven’t established why we must do the second first, other than paranoid screeching about traps and misdirection. I’m going to stop responding to you. I’m sorry, anon. I thought we could’ve gone somewhere.

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » mxvabIoSIE No.13130317]

>>13130302
He can’t even give one. Communist live in an abstract reality, angrily stomping their feet when it can’t be manifested in phenomenal space.

[Anonymous No.13130325]

>>13130302
My point is that you must honor human rights even if the consequences are catastrophic/fatal. You’re free to disagree with this, but I don’t think consequential arguments will jive well with what you appear to believe.

[Anonymous No.13130329]

>>13130291
>Isn't Turkey majority Turk in Anatolia?
it is after they genocided all of the native anatolians living there before them

[Anonymous No.13130353]

>>13130282
Whoops, forgot to respond to you.
>foreign group
This is a good question. I’ve said a few times elsewhere that I’m not sure where you would draw the line. We can debate this if you’d like. It appears, at least to me, that the right to life is a good place to start. I think we’d both agree that life is a human right. (I hope we both agree.) In this scenario you’d be allowed to defend your community and interests as long as it doesn’t threaten anyone else’s life, because that’s a rights violation. I’m open to debate on the specifics of rights. Could be wrong here. But something tells me that right to life is pretty fundamental.
>how would they fare
I don’t know. Another great question about when, if ever, you can violate someone else’s rights to defend your own. I don’t know where to draw the line here. Any ideas?

[Anonymous No.13130357]

>>13130325
>>13130353
(To elaborate; my gut belief may lead me to say that you must honor human rights, even if this means you’ll die. I’m not sure about that but that might be where I end up. You might think this is insane. Valid.)

[Anonymous No.13130364]

>>13130308
>The ones who hold power (donors, administrators, presidents, boards) are largely right wing
u w0t m8
>Yes, on occasion, laymen have proved entire fields wrong
This is not about that. This is about a whole neoliberal progressive worldview being essentially the prevailing ideology of the whole system and so being espoused by virtually every institution, academia being only one. Just refer to the concept of woke capital for its most egregious manifestation.

>both my brother and the stranger have an equal right to life.
Yes (debatable, but I don't want to get into how we could value people, that's a whole other can of worms and I'm very unsure about that).
>The decision should be utterly impossible, and I should have to flip a coin
No, man, what? You're not a machine, you're a human being. You don't operate on blind logic nor should you want to. You're gonna choose your brother every time, and that stranger's friend will choose him every time, and that's perfectly fine. And we're evidently operating on a different conception of rights because I still don't see how you violate that guy's rights because you choose your brother over him in the fire.
>If it’s the second, that calls into question the entire UK
Well, self-determination is there and Scotland voted NO, for example.
>countries aren’t quite as simple as one land for one people
Of course not, but I say it should be the ideal to strive for.
>If Korea’s invasion would have been successful, Japan’s current culture would’ve been drastically different.
Yeah, so? It would be a different culture, maybe it would be part of Korea and the peoples would be the same (doubtful due to that same geographical distance), I fail to see how this is relevant to the discussion.

[Anonymous No.13130365]

>>13130325

[Anonymous No.13130387]

>>13130329
I already answered this >>13130119

>In this scenario you’d be allowed to defend your community and interests as long as it doesn’t threaten anyone else’s life, because that’s a rights violation
If by defense you mean defense to an attack, then it's self defense and justifiable. Otherwise, in principle I agree.
>I don’t know
Well, a group with a strong sense of self would definitively conquer, destroy, or however you want to put it, a group with universalizing values so extreme that it doesn't even see itself as a group.
>you can violate someone else’s rights to defend your own
Are you saying that in your eyes the right to self defense isn't legitimate, or what?

[Anonymous No.13130396]

>>13130387
meant to reply to >>13130353

[Anonymous No.13130413]

>>13130364
I don’t think we’ll get far on the first two. Academics largely push left wing social views, yes, but this doesn’t mean they have much actual clout. Again I don’t think we’ll get far here.
>brother and stranger
>coin
If they both have equal right to life then in a perfect world I must flip a coin. You may think that the brother has more rights, and that’s a defensible position, but if you do believe that, then people don’t have equal rights.
>Scotland
Good we agree on this one. Scotland shouldn’t exist either though but we won’t make much headway here.
>Korea
If korea’s invasion would have been successful, then the entire idea of one land one people would be called into question. Take the Roman invasion of Britain, which was a limited success. Was Britain “pure” before the Romans and “corrupted” after it?

[Anonymous No.13130430]

>>13130387
Tricky, tricky. Really good questions. I’m not sure. If human rights are inviolable, and life is the most basic right, and self-defense necessitates killing in this scenario, then you’re not allowed to kill. This is uncomfortable. I’m not sure I believe it. On the other hand, I’m not sure how we define threat, or self-defense, or or or, which seems pretty crucial to what we’re discussing, and I think we’ll define these rights based mostly from our political beliefs. I’m not sure we can approach anything objective from this point unless you can see a way forward.

[Anonymous No.13130469]

>>13130413
>I don’t think we’ll get far on the first two
Well, why not? What do you mean by right wing views by those with power in academia?
>If they both have equal right to life then in a perfect world I must flip a coin
But you're not the arbiter of rights here. You're not a judge presiding over a case and being neutral to it. Again, such a view seems to me that can only derive in a scenario where people are like machines without affection. How would it not?
I won't say it's not an interesting and original (at least to me) viewpoint... just more dystopic than pretty much anything I've encountered, save being in favor of relinquishing our humanity to AIs.
>Scotland shouldn’t exist either
Aren't Scots in general much more alike each other, and therefore definiable as a group, than Scots and Brits or Scots and Indians?
>then the entire idea of one land one people would be called into question
Not really, in that case Japan would have adopted Korean culture over time, either resulting in Oriental Korea or in a Japan alternative to what we have today. Same with the Rome example. In any case I already said I don't think conquest is legitimate today, but the past is unchangeable.

>>13130430
>self-defense necessitates killing in this scenario, then you’re not allowed to kill
So would you only be allowed to kill only once the other guy tries to kill you but fails (otherwise ur ded)? At the very least you say you don't believe this with certainty, and I'm sure you would agree that any group with this mindset will not prevail enough to propagate said mindset.
>I’m not sure how we define threat
Well, naturally this will be muddy, a guy throwing a punch is not the same as a guy stabbing you with a knife, but what about in between? And what if you kill him in battle because you give him a good punch? Better not to punch and to receive the aggression?
I don't think your view of rights is healthy for yourself. Of course thou shall not kill, but that's not an absolute unless you're a holy man.

[Anonymous No.13130523]

>>13130469
>why not
Because it’s obvious that you think leftists run academia, and in my experience I think they run the classroom but not the board of directors, and the board of directors holds all the real power.
>right to life
I believe that moral rights are like the laws of mathematics. They exist independent of us and operate without regard for situation or emotion. Two and two don’t make five, no matter how much a child wants them to. I’m not the arbiter of rights, yes. That’s exactly my point — we must honor human rights, even when doing so would cause great harm or personal pain — in the same way that two and two must always make four, even when making five would bring about a better scenario. If I flipped a coin and saved a stranger I would grieve. My emotions don’t mean my brother has more of a right to life than the stranger. This view leads to some pretty counterintuitive and uncomfortable conclusions. It’s alright if this doesn’t sit well with you. It’s pretty hard for me to grapple with.
>scots
Maybe, maybe not. I’m sure I could rustle up a dozen scots who feel strongly patriotic. I’m sure I could rustle up a dozen who feel no affinity towards their countrymen or their country. This connects with the Korea point. I was trying to establish that “cultural affinity” is, in my view, largely a matter of circumstance and accident. If that view holds, there’s no particular reason why we must honor our countrymen or country above others.
>self-defense
You’re right. A group with an absolute mindset on right to life would be wiped out. That’s an uncomfortable conclusion. You might find it ridiculous - and that’s okay - but you’ll have to explain why, sometimes, people don’t have a right to life, or why that right can be violated.
>not healthy
Might not be. But that’s the thing with absolutes. It’s the ultimate “facts don’t care about your feelings.”

[The Nomad !N8Yn.I/WbM No.13130615]

>>13129782
So CTH doesn’t support drag kids?

[Anonymous No.13130621]

>>13130523
>they run the classroom but not the board of directors, and the board of directors holds all the real power.
I don't know about the details of this, but if leftists have no power in academia how do you explain the very obvious ideological leaning and the ideas they push into society at large?
Maybe it is much more obvious to me than to an Anglo, because on one side I can see it developing and normalizing on the internet (feminism, intersectionality, tranny shit) and then I see the exact same pathway being laid in my third world country, which runs a few years behind (with leftists in universities saying the exact same shit, with a few variations based on the local differences).
>we must honor human rights, even when doing so would cause great harm or personal pain
To a point, fine, in the same manner that we shouldn't kill off everyone who is powerless to stop it because it would benefit us. But you can see how, in the other extreme, this is not tenable at all, right?
Again, maybe if you're a holy man that would not kill even to defend his family (though even here I doubt it, there was this story about a Buddhist master who travelled by ship, and there was a man who wanted to sink the ship to steal the valuables left behind. The master killed this guy, justified because he avoided a greater evil than the killing itself, and even saved him from commiting bad karma)
>My emotions don’t mean my brother has more of a right to life than the stranger
Another point with this is that it simply isn't in concordance with human nature. We are tribal animals. You have to take both things into account to have a balanced view, because extreme 1 is being a caveman who kills Grug because he's from the cave across the pond, and extreme 2 is your scenario.
>scots who feel strongly patriotic
I'm not talking about patriotism, just people who share a culture and values in general, whether they own it or no.
>largely a matter of circumstance and accident
Sure, and? It also has a biological component, of course.
>there’s no particular reason why we must honor our countrymen or country above others
I don't see how that follows.
>people don’t have a right to life, or why that right can be violated
For starters, the guy who tries to kill me is denying me that right, so I must retaliate, and I'm not a lvl 100 monk that can defeat him without killing him with my gun.
>It’s the ultimate “facts don’t care about your feelings.”
Well, neither of this is a fact to be fair. We're discussing abstracts and if anything you're not taking human nature into account.

[Anonymous No.13130740]

>>13130621
>human nature, right to life, etc
I’ll address this first. Yes, my moral framework runs counter to our (supposed) natural inclination, but my moral framework (I claim) is inviolable. What I want doesn’t matter. What I feel inclined towards doesn’t matter. What matters is the moral code, which cannot be violated. There’s also no particular reason why we should respect “human nature.” “It feels right” isn’t really an argument for many reasons, and I put “human nature” in quotes because that idea itself is highly debatable. I’m not sure there’s a set way that all people feel inclined to act all the time, everywhere, throughout history. But that might be another debate.
>intellectuals push lefty shit
Sometimes, yes. They appear to be gaining ground on social issues. I would argue that these social advances are largely nominal or (no pun intended) skin deep. I’m an American, and I may see more transgender people on television, but the fact of their representation (and increasing acceptance) doesn’t mean that everyone’s totally alright with them, and it doesn’t mean they’re treated equally, and it doesn’t mean they’re not legally discriminated against. Many American intellectuals fancy themselves right wing or centrist and spend a good deal of time at corporate think tanks, right wing research hubs, etc. tl;dr transgender people might gain ground in your country but this doesn’t seriously threaten your country’s organization any more than Caitlyn Jenner destabilized America’s government
>country formation as circumstance
I wasn’t very clear here. If a country’s formation and culture is largely accidental, there’s no clear reason why it must be honored and defended, no? For example say china conquered the US. (We both agree this is bad. Just say it happened.) Five hundred years down the line, my descendants may speak Chinese, consider themselves Chinese, study the Chinese classics, and play Chinese instruments. Must their culture be honored and defended if it was illegitimately seized from America? If not, then it appears that ideas of “countrymen” and “culture” are mostly circumstantial. If so, same thing.
>biological component
What biological component? We return to the Roman invasion of Britain. Did the Roman invasion “pollute” Britain in some way, or pollute modern day France? Keep in mind that at the time, Anglo-Saxons, Gauls, and Romans all considered themselves separate races.

[Anonymous No.13130745]

>>13128798
>Dude, you are so lucky my cousin's not here

[The Nomad !N8Yn.I/WbM No.13130749]

>>13130745
Do you feel like you’re winning

[Anonymous No.13130769]

>>13129739
Every chapo thread is full of fake posts like this. It's super funny and totally owns

[Anonymous No.13130779]

>>13129864
corncob

[Anonymous No.13130782]

>>13129881
Who are you quoting

[Anonymous No.13131070]

>>13129927

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020/

OH NO NO NO NO NO

[Anonymous No.13131093]

>>13130042

Anon, ''rights'' are also literally lines on paper.

[Anonymous No.13131342]

>>13130615
None of those Twitter screenshots are real.