/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14347366]

books on the negrofication of american culture and by extension western culture?

[Anonymous No.14347378]

>>14347366
The negro is just the face. Take him out and what does the culture say through that race? That’s the terrifying part. You’re wrong to look at that same culture springing up all over the world, from China to Sweden, and think its a reflection of some race

[Anonymous No.14347396]

God damn racial theory has ruined the west. Instead of evangelizing ethnic culture to all those within your country, you push them into arbitrary boxes and treat them accordingly. The west will balkanize and you people are at fault. London, fucking London, has a secessionist movement. This idea of urban secession will continue as you force those people whom you do not like into these boxes and away from white societies. The west will split apart and you're playing in the mud of decay.

[Anonymous No.14347400]

Uhhhh no

[Anonymous No.14347401]

>>14347366
i've gotten a feeling you've never read a book before

[Anonymous No.14347473]

>>14347366
Adorno on jazz.

[Anonymous No.14347476]

>>14347366

[Anonymous No.14347506]

>>14347366
It is less to do with other races, more to do with Spiteful Mutants (pic related). These mutants are self destructive as well as destructive to all around them. As an example, Ireland is collapsing culturally due to the Irish as much as the foreigners she is being flooded with.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=K5yLaBaFIPQ

[Anonymous No.14347524]

>>14347396
Balkanisation is a good thing. I support it any way I can. Smaller political units mean that people run their own affairs rather than being dictated to. It is the opposite of Caesarism, Globalism, and Imperialism.

[Anonymous No.14347564]

[Anonymous No.14347575]

>>14347378
The negro is just the face. Take him out and look behind the face.
Fixed

[Anonymous No.14347584]

>>14347396
The people who advocated for third world immigration are the cause of balkanization. The west doesn't have magic dirt that turns sub humans into productive members of society. The west is a better place to live than say, sub saharan African, because the average European is in all ways genetically superior to the average African.

Social sciences built on tabula rasa have ruined the west. Lysenkoists were given too much power and they wrecked us just like they wrecked the Soviet Union before.

[Anonymous No.14347609]

>>14347584
The Soviet Union was destroyed by latent ethonationalist movements that were not snuffed out when they had the chance. The very same thing will happen to the US within 50 years.

[Anonymous No.14347614]

>>14347524
Humanity will stagnate under this paradigm. There's a reason that the grandest countries make the most progress in the realms of science, agriculture and war.

[Anonymous No.14347653]

>>14347564
>being too dumb to rotate a photo
leave

[Anonymous No.14347698]

>>14347609
Those movements were caused by the diversity of the Soviet Union. USSR had natural diversity. The west has unnatural, imported diversity.

Either way the rot comes from having a diverse population. At least the USSR had a bunch of angry Slavs rather than a bunch of worthless niggers.

[Anonymous No.14347729]

>>14347698
The rot comes from not erasing this diversity. The thing I hate about you ethnonationalists is that you have nothing prescriptive to say. You simply note that things are bad, blame it on nigs and spics and wash your hands of it, while the world changes around you. While the libs and leftists shape the world according to their design.

The blacks are here to stay, as are the Arabs. You can either try and fail to ethnically cleanse them or you can accept this fact and act accordingly before the west crumbles to ash. These people must be assimilated fully to the culture of the nation they reside in. That means that tribalists that would seek to keep them isolated must be silenced. Racial theory must be treated like the joke it is and not be mentioned by anyone in power, in schools or on the bloody census. For the same reason we don't group ourselves seriously by hair and eye color, so too will the future no longer consist of this black/white/brown trichotomy.

[Anonymous No.14347751]

>>14347698
certain types of "diversity" is more functional than other types

[Anonymous No.14348314]

>>14347729
I like that you at least seem to be a consistent liberal in following your line of thought to its conclusion, that is the erasure of diversity. Typically you people follow the hilariously contradictory thought pattern of: "diversity is good, and diversity is not a problem because people are all the same!".

We want people like you to speak loudly though. People aren't likely to listen to us ethnonationalists ranting about the mulatto consumerist (not much diversity here!) future of the West. But, through liberals like you, our dystopian vision is given an expression and a platform, and many people, including the actually pro-diversity multiculturalist crowd, will turn against this future. It's already happening!

[Anonymous No.14348341]

>>14348314
God we can only hope so.

[Anonymous No.14348367]

>>14347366
Reminder to ignore all pseudointellectual rhetoriticians and instead go and read the complete works of Homer, Pindar, Plato, Aristotle, Sophocles, Euripedes, Hesiod, Aristophones, Herodotus, Sappho, Plutarch, Ovid, Virgil, Lucretius, Arisoto, Horace, St. Augustine, Marcus Aurelius, Rabelais, Dante, Petrarch, Boccaccio, Machiavelli, Luther, Cervantes, Chaucer, the Beowulf poet, Chretien de Troyes, Marie de France, Sterne, Burton, Browne, Wyatt, Sidney, Percy Shelley, Tennyson, Donne, Pope, Dryden, Bacon, Novalis, Schelling, Schlegel, Hegel, Pascal, Lichtenberg, Dickinson, Shakespeare, Ibsen, Dickens, Marlowe, Diderot, Jonson, Goethe, Bunyan, Gibbon, Addison, Smollett, Milton, Johnson, Boswell, Emerson, Quincey, Burke, Spinoza, Leibniz, Hume, Kant, Mary Shelley, Wollstonecraft, Racine, Baudelaire, Valery, Rimbaud, Verlaine, Moliere, Montaigne, Browning, Gray, Holderlin, Schiller, Shaw, Voltaire, Hugo, Balzac, Zola, Colette, Duras, Dumas, Stendhal, Nerval, Flaubert, Mallarme, Malraux, Chateaubriand, Artaud, Poe, Wordsworth, Coleridge, Blake, Byron, Keats, Arnold, Pater, Walter Scott, Swinburne, Rossetti, Carroll, William James, Henry James, Hawthorne, Twain, Melville, Dewey, Bergson, Whitehead, George Eliot, Williams, Frost, Cummings, Crane, Stevens, Whitman, Plath, Trakl, Rilke, Celan, Montale, Neruda, Lorca, Tagore, Manzoni, Peake, Murdoch, Wharton, Wilde, Leopardi, Faulkner, O'Connor, Passos, Nietzsche, Marx, Adorno, Bloch, Lukacs, Bakhtin, Hamsun, Pushkin, Gogol, Tolstoy, Turgenev, Chekhov, Andreyev, Bely, Bulgakov, Gonchorov, Camoes, Pessoa, Queiroz, Saramago, Paz, Borges, Bloy, Pirandello, Huysmans, Lautreamont, Schwob, Casares, Bolano, Cortazar, Lima, Donoso, de Assis, Carpentjier, Celine, Marquez, Unamuno, Gracq, Gide, Jarry, Camus, Conrad, Wells, Hardy, Salinger, Lawrence, Forster, Hrabal, Swift, Bronte, Woolf, Bachelard, Roussel, Beckett, Proust, Nabokov, Joyce, O'Brien, Yeats, Waugh, Heaney, Auden, Hofmannsthal, Mann, Musil, Broch, Zweig, Bachmann, Jelinek, Lessing, Laxness, Simenon,Svevo, Levi, Buzzati, Quasimodo, Llosa, Walser, Kafka, Babel, Schulz, Transtromer, Kertesz, Pavic, Andric, Grossmann,Sillanpää, Linna, Mahfouz, Boll, Grass, Canetti, Pavese, Robbe-Grillet, Blanchot, Perec, Calvino, Bernhard, Gass, Barth, Gaddis, Vollmann, Vidal, Hawkes, DeLillo, Pynchon, McElroy, Soseki, Murasaki, Shonagon, Kawabata, Mishima, Akutagawa, Tanizaki, Dazai, Oe, Xingjian, Yan, Kosztolanyi, Gombrowicz, Ishiguro, Eco, Coetzee, Auerbach, Benjamin, Barthes, Pasternak, Derrida, Deleuze, Bateson, Foucault, Lyotard, Mcluhan, Eichenbaum, Steiner, Munro, Carson, Handke, Theroux, Patrick White, Alfau, Marias, Enard, Claude Simon, Elizabeth Bishop, Markson, Lowry, Bellow, Dara.

[Anonymous No.14348400]

>>14348314
That future is inevitable. You can't stop people fucking

[Anonymous No.14348414]

>>14348400
>m-muh cummies
The utter state of the post-modern globohomo liberal

[Anonymous No.14348706]

haven't read it but i think this might me what you're looking for

[Anonymous No.14348726]

>>14347564
What’s this from?

[Anonymous No.14348906]

>>14347614
>stagnate
Are you in a hurry? Where do you wanna go?

[Anonymous No.14348933]

African Americans are part of western civ now. Same with pretty much everywhere

[Anonymous No.14348997]

>>14348400
>you can’t stop fucking

We can and will, coomer filth. The awakening is coming. You won’t have anymore places to hide on Earth. Just go back to Hell.

[Anonymous No.14349020]

>>14348933
>Same with pretty much everywhere
Where apart from the West(including latin america) and Africa are they part of civilization? They barely exist in Asia and much of Europe

[Anonymous No.14349092]

>>14347366
there's no negro culture without anglo culture

[Anonymous No.14349127]

>>14349020
>They barely exist in Asia and much of Europe
Most of Asia is brown dumbass, and Europe is full of nigs and getting fuller

[Anonymous No.14349519]

>>14347614
>progress
define, please

[Anonymous No.14349522]

>>14347396
>arbitrary boxes

[Anonymous No.14349880]

>>14347366
>implying its negrofication
>implying negrofication itself is not just romancization
Black people are one vector of it and contribute their own culture, but the cultural destiny of the Americas is Iberophone. Francophone culture is similar enough to integrate, but anglophone culture will be mostly rejected. I want a Black wife, though.

[Anonymous No.14349886]

>>14347584
This is probably the most true post ever made on /lit/ but people will ignore it because the truth hurts.

[Anonymous No.14349922]

>>14347396
>This idea of urban secession will continue as you force those people whom you do not like into these boxes and away from white societies.
But that's literally what I want more than anything.
The next step once they're all in one place is to cut the power and stop delivering food.

[Anonymous No.14350749]

>>14347366
Bow and the Club, by Evola

[Anonymous No.14350754]

>>14349922
Based.

[Anonymous No.14350781]

>>14347401
I've gotten a feeling you've never stepped foot outside of your basement before.

[Anonymous No.14350800]

>>14348997
Holy based.

[Anonymous No.14350841]

>>14348706
Sargon of Akkad's favorite book

[Anonymous No.14350952]

>>14349922
Based and redpilled

[Anonymous No.14351011]

>>14349922
You understand that the urban centers are the hubs of production, right?

[Anonymous No.14351123]

>>14351011
>production
Demolish the cities and return to the English manor system

Urban areas are doomed for failure in the authoritarian agrarian future

[Anonymous No.14351639]

>>14347366
unironically Gravity's Rainbow....

[Anonymous No.14351653]

>>14347366
Evola wrote quite a few articles on this. Reminder that R&B/Jazz has its roots in literal voodoo intended to control the bodies of those it curses.

[Anonymous No.14351658]

>>14351011
We already solved the city-rural divide with city states.

[Anonymous No.14351711]

>>14347506

Adorno:

"Capitalism makes popular culture degenerate"

Your nigger-iq ass:

"Adorno wanted capitalism to make popular culture degenerate!"

[Anonymous No.14351786]

>>14347614
>we need to progress
Why? What even is progress? The only objectively good thing I can think of is better medicine. Technology is certainly not necessarily a good thing. What if we just paused things where they are now? Whats wrong with that? Why do we need spaceships and holograms? We don't is what I'm saying.

[Anonymous No.14351878]

>>14347396
>imports unprecedented levels of non-Europeans into Europe and the Anglosphere
>very few people truly love it or gain anything from this strikingly retarded human event
>due to forced pluralism only a contradictory policy state can manage this so called freedom
>blames people who never wanted them here in the first place for all of this
Really makes you think.

[Anonymous No.14351886]

>>14351011
Production of what? What does the post-industrial urban West actually produce?

[Anonymous No.14351917]

>>14347614
>Bigger countries publish more scientific papers hurr durr
No, really?

[Anonymous No.14351935]

>>14351878
Eh, you reap what you sow. You wont find me weeping for the European immigration problem when you constructed artificial states in ME and Africa with no ethnic homogenity or thought for the religious unity of the state. Y'know, the things you people fought about for a millennia? Literal paradigm shifting wars have been fought in Europe over sectarian divides in religion and you made MULTIPLE states with a Sunni/Shia mix? What did you honestly expect?

The bottom line is that they're here to stay. And isolating and alienating them only breeds violence and division. America used to be damned good for a few decades at bringing it's ethnic petri dish together under one identity. You have to integrate your Arabs ad blacks. It is the only path to peace Abolish private religious schools, make everyone learn the same things and embrace the same nationalistic dogma that every country teaches. They should all pledge some sort of allegiance to your nation every morning. You must start with the Children.
>>14351786
>>14351886
Luddites pls go and stay go

[Anonymous No.14351947]

>>14347366
>books on the negrofication of american culture and by extension western culture?

[Anonymous No.14351955]

>>14351935
Oh ok so its justified as a punishment in your mind.

[Anonymous No.14351982]

>>14351935
So everyone should let Muslims go around killing all infidels. Great, they're already doing that in Europe so I guess the future of Europe is secured.

[Anonymous No.14351983]

>>14351935
leftypol dying ruined this board again. Can't you faggots make a discord or something instead?

[Anonymous No.14351998]

>>14351711
Adorno was in charge of brainwashing post war germany using those methods. The frankfurt school was absolutely not opposed to using unsavory methods for their own control, and didn't find many of them as unsavory as most would assume. Just because you can recognize the impact of something that is clearly negative doesn't mean you are vehemently opposed to the power produced by those negative results.

[Anonymous No.14352003]

>>14351955
I didn't say that. I said that its expected. You really, and I hope you can acknowledge this, really fucked up the ME and North Africa. Not talking the slave trade here, you literally shoved ethnicities and religions that hated each other into one nation, then upheld those national structures when you had the opportunity to change them. It's your fault.
My real beef is this; "What do you want to do". You ethnnationalists complain about the turbanites, but the only solution that would please you is their eradication. That's untenable. It will never happen. If you try it, the western hyperglobohomo hegemon will R2P your ass until a lesbian transgender furry is the prime minister of Poland. The only solution to white cultural erasure is to get the non whites assimilated into white culture.
>>14351982
H-how did you get there from my post? In countries without the stringent free speech protections of the US, these anti(insert nation here) institutions shouldn't even be allowed to exist. The moment some minor Imam says "fuck Hungary", his church should be shut down. All religious schools should be shut down etc.
>>14351983
Not a leftist.

[Anonymous No.14352031]

>>14351935
>when you constructed
I didn't do shit you crazy fucking neo-Calvinist. These changes were made by international finance and the bureaucrats and moralfags who fap to notions of progress like you. God damn, if anyone does suffer from the balkanization (which probably also won't happen) I hope that it's "people" like you.

>>14351935
>Luddites pls go and stay go
No, seriously, what do modern urban areas produce? There have been some changes in the last few years to bolster manufacturing but this wasn't any of your doing. It's just an import/export hub, a conglomerate of nameless, faceless, atomized consumers... That is your modern urban West. I don't blame the people wanting to break away or cling to their old identity. This civilizational rot of the West is what pushes them to those inclusive patterns. Any sane person would do the same.

[Anonymous No.14352045]

>>14352003
>Not a leftist
You don't know what leftism is, which is a very leftist trait. Honestly calling you a leftist is too much credit, you're just a generic neo-liberal establishment normalfag that "isn't like the other girls".

[Anonymous No.14352048]

Destroy all nazis

[Anonymous No.14352054]

>>14352003
>The only solution to white cultural erasure is to get the non whites assimilated into white culture.
This has already been attempted. Just fucking deport them, your mutt slum race will not pan out well for anyone, including your pets.

[Anonymous No.14352075]

>>14352031
>inclusive
I meant exclusive fuck

[Anonymous No.14352083]

>>14352054
>>14352045
>>14352031
What is your solution. This entire thread has just reinforced my idea that far right wingers have no solutions, just gripes.
>Kick them out
You cannot mass deport citizens. That is ethnic cleansing. R2P will be used, your leader will be killed, your country will be tossed into successionist chaos.

What will you do about the millions of unintegrated browns and blacks currently residing in your crystal palaces? How will you save the white race from islamification? From developing the negro gait? What is your plan? What are you doing?

[Anonymous No.14352098]

>>14352003
>all religious school should be shut down
Oh look, it's a retard.
There's literally no way to force people to stop being religious or stop religious education. Parents will put religion before the law.
The only way to get rid of religion is to have never had one with strong survivability and infectivity in the first place. Formerly major Buddhist countries (Japan and China) has become the most irreligious because Buddhism isn't a highly infective or resilient religion, but the Abrahamic religions are all extremely infective and tenacious so it takes an extremely long time and a lot of circumstantial factors to wipe these communities out, and it's certainly impossible from signing a piece of legislation.

[Anonymous No.14352120]

>>14352083
>What is your solution
I already told you. Make a discord and stay there. You all successfully migrated to leftypol with acceptable crossposting. Migrate again, discord seems very suitable to your tastes.

[Anonymous No.14352132]

>>14352098
I don't care about the parents, you target the children. The 2nd gen immigrants are the ones who stick out, not the parents.You have to play the long game, you must accept that this is not an issue that will be solved by signing a piece of paper and trying really hard for 2 years. Ask any western nation how infectious the religion of the parents are on the children, what with the bulk of them being atheists at worst and irreligious at best. After two generations I promise that religion will be nothing more than an accessory, as it is now.
>>14352120
So you have no solution. You're just gonna austistically screech about blacks into the aether while they take over your countries. Good luck.

[Anonymous No.14352149]

>>14352132
I don't know if you keep up with reality but Muslim parents are forcing schools to shut down their liberal "gender education" and Europeans are converting to Islam in record-high numbers.
Is this what you mean when you say religion is disappearing?

[Anonymous No.14352169]

>>14352132
>So you have no solution. You're just gonna austistically screech about blacks into the aether while they take over your countries. Good luck.

Are you so fucking insecure you can't comprehend of someone not taking you seriously? I haven't been following this thread of the conversation and I don't give a shit about it. I only care about you and those like you flooding the board. I only skimmed your comments. The prose and general assumptions expose you. Take your tribe and start a discord to talk about your gay shit in your gay ways. Unlike the discord trannies you didn't seem to raid here often when leftypol was around, only popping up when zizek or some pop-culture philosopher did something relevant. /lit/ went from being one of the worst boards to the best boards and now it's becoming one of the worst boards again. I already see the failed writer threads popping up frequently again.

[Anonymous No.14352177]

>>14352149
Sounds like you're turning mountains into molehills. You know what happens when education is mandatory and there are no alternatives to state education? They can scream all they like, but their child will be educated in western schools. But I do agree, Islam is having a worrying influence on the West. I believe it can be combated, but it isn't. Those who wish to combat it aren't coming up with ways to do so.
>>14352169
You've sure wasted a lot of ink on someone you don't take seriously, friend.

[Anonymous No.14352185]

>>14352177
>Making mountains out of molehills
Ironic

[Anonymous No.14352194]

>>14352177
>You've sure wasted a lot of ink on someone you don't take seriously, friend.
Because i'm not talking to you specifically. I consider you to be a symptom of a spreading disease.

[Anonymous No.14352208]

>>14352083
>You cannot mass deport citizens.That is ethnic cleansing.
Well, I can. We can. White people can. China is doing it right now, but then again they don't tolerate neo-Calvinist moral faggots or chinese people who stand in direct opposition to Chinese interests, unlike baizuo . And I would never relegate deportations to any one ethnicity. And I certainly wouldn't leave them subject to your social experiments for more generations. No. The governments of the West for many decades now have been illegitimate bottom bitches for international finance. And if my gripes are no more effective than le revolution you faggots LARP about, well, then that puts us at even for now, unfortunately. But one day soon we will not tolerate, we will not comply. And I hope it's fucking soon.

[Anonymous No.14352233]

>>14352208
They tried deporting the jews, no one would take them.

[Anonymous No.14352234]

>>14352149
>down their liberal "gender education" and Europeans are converting to Islam in record-high numbers
source: your ass

[Anonymous No.14352251]

>>14348997
Based

[Anonymous No.14352266]

>>14352234
Maybe go read the news once in a while. It'll do you good to connect with reality and take in what's actually happening in the world instead of inside your head.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/mar/04/birmingham-school-stops-lgbt-lessons-after-parent-protests

[Anonymous No.14352268]

>>14352266
yeah sure, one school, what about "Europeans are converting to Islam in record-high numbers" claim?

[Anonymous No.14352336]

>>14351935
>> You can't mass deport people!

This the most amusing lie of all, usually peddled by threatened Brown and Black; these cockroaches know very well just how unnatural the situation is, but they want to create an air of inevitability that everything is normal and nothing will change. The truth is that we can not only deport you but completely extinguish your life if we want to. Ethnic cleansing is very real and happens frequently. The West is like a kettle waiting to explode, once people have realized the illusion foisted in front of our eyes is only to distract and deviate us from what really matters (race, blood, land) then you are absolutely finished. This is inevitable.

[Anonymous No.14352361]

>>14352336
Not him but mass deportation will require a politically unified population or a totalitarian government and neither of those are very popular in mainstream Western culture right now.

[Anonymous No.14352375]

>>14347366
Jung has a number of essays on this in volume 10 and 17 of his collected works. Ultimately he argued that's what made America Superior to Europe

[Anonymous No.14352376]

>>14352361
Obviously you can't rock the boat you need to sink it. His nievity comes from thinking the neoliberal order has any interest in his assimilation, and that assimilation itself has only worked historically with an actual and not defacto caste system in place, so people identified with their roles more than anything. I'm sure he doesn't find assimilation as subordination as palatable, but he probably wouldn't mind as much if they came as conquerors and subordinated the natives instead.

[Anonymous No.14352410]

>>14352376
The people importing immigrants into European countries are, as you say, not after assimilation or cultural enrichment but rather a labour force that the ageing population of Europe can't provide. They don't have an interest in assimilation but they have a reason to oppose deportation of their precious labour force that keeps breeding itself.

[Anonymous No.14352414]

>>14347729
> You can either try and fail to ethnically cleanse them.

For some men, this was the entire purpose of life. Mein Kampf = My struggle (my racial struggle).

[Anonymous No.14352440]

This thread exemplifies why fash bashing is okay lol.

[Anonymous No.14352455]

>>14352440
Care to elaborate?

[Anonymous No.14352471]

>>14352455
Claims of wanting to violently deport people from their homes?

[Anonymous No.14352487]

>>14352471
And how do you justify violently converting people (I assume that's the end goal of your "bashing") out of their political ideologies if violence is not ok?

[Anonymous No.14352488]

>>14352471
The last man lives the longest

[Anonymous No.14352494]

>>14351935
>America used to be damned good for a few decades at bringing it's ethnic petri dish together under one identity.

America’s ‘ethnic petri dish’ was exclusively Western European, and most of that was still made up of British Islanders. So yes, British people and their immediate neighbors and ethnic cousins from Northwest Europe were able to form a cohesive culture. Nothing about this could suggest that shitskins NEED TO GTFO of the West.

[Anonymous No.14352499]

>>14352487
eh I never claimed violence wasn't okay. I claimed violently deporting people from their homes was bad and therefore using violence to stop such an action is good.

[Anonymous No.14352501]

>>14352440
This thread exemplifies why fash will bash your whole family to death.

[Anonymous No.14352504]

>>14352501
"Why do people advocate for violence against fascists"

[Anonymous No.14352505]

>>14352499
And using violence to uphold immigration laws is good too.

[Anonymous No.14352510]

>>14352499
Can you explain what difference between
>violently deporting people from their homes
and
>using violence to stop such an action
results in the former being unacceptable whilst the latter is acceptable?

[Anonymous No.14352512]

>>14352505
This isn't a coherent political position. You're giving a blank check legitimacy to any law that might be passed concerning immigration. You could use this claim to justify open borders or isolationism. It's a non claim.

[Anonymous No.14352513]

>>14352504
There are no fascists alive in the 21st century. Fascism is a defunct political movement from almost a hundred yeaes ago. When people say ‘bash the fash’ they really mean hordes of savage shitskins attacking white grandmothers and children at Trump rallies.

[Anonymous No.14352518]

>>14352510
The harm done to humans in the first action far outweighs the benefit humanity gains. While in the second one the harm done to the fascists is outdone by the wellbeing of the people who get to keep their homes and lives.

[Anonymous No.14352522]

>>14352513
When I mean bash the fash I mean bash the fash. I am not interested in arguing for positions I do not hold.

[Anonymous No.14352525]

>>14352513
>>14352505
>>14352501
I'm going to have to ask you guys to not post if you're not going to contribute to a reasonable discussion to the relevant topic.

[Anonymous No.14352528]

>>14352518
You’re an insane ideologue and your schizo ramblings get almost zero sympathy from the common people.

[Anonymous No.14352531]

>>14352504
Because secretly everyone knows only fascism can save us now. The left wants strong men to come back in fashion to mercy kill them, fuck them, restore natural order, give them meaning and purpose, to kill the international bankers, etc., etc., etc. And this will probably happen soon enough.

[Anonymous No.14352534]

>>14352528
Compliments won't get you anywhere.

[Anonymous No.14352535]

>>14352522
Fine. Let’s watch you ‘bash the fash’ in this upcoming 2020 election and get your fucking head blown off by someone with a CC.

[Anonymous No.14352536]

>>14352518
How is this "benefit to humans" measured in a tangible quantity?
Dopamine?
Money?

If you don't have a set standard by which to measure such things, you cannot use a utilitarian argument.

[Anonymous No.14352541]

>>14352531
I'm sure most of humanity isn't secretly longing for strong whites to kill them. I know I'm not.

[Anonymous No.14352545]

>>14352512
>rule of law is not a coherent political position
Laws can justify force. Creating legitimate authority is a very real political aim.

[Anonymous No.14352546]

>>14352525
> speaking the truth is 'not contributing to the discussion', where by 'discussion' we mean the leftist definition of "sit quietly while you're being violently re-educated"
Yikes, lad.

[Anonymous No.14352549]

Look all this "Bash the Fash", "Punch a Nazi" etc. is the Left trying to manifest these ideas. These ideas are creations of the left. There are no Nazis lol. There are no fascist, at least not yet, lol. They through around these terms like these people actually exist. They don't but they are trying to create them. The left has been trying to create a white male boogie man for 30 years. They have failed. But I feel like they eventually be successful lol.

[Anonymous No.14352552]

>>14352522
Then where are the fascists? ‘Fascist’ is just a dogwhistle to refer to conservatives. Your slogans are only used to justify attacking anyone with a different political opinion.

[Anonymous No.14352554]

>>14352541
You’re longing for strong browns.

[Anonymous No.14352555]

>>14352535
So you're basically claiming republicans are fascists? Interesting?
>>14352536
Happiness. Having a strong metric to measure happiness would make the theorizing on how to achieve happiness easier. But even without such a standard or knowledge of the neurological reasons behind happiness I can observe when people are happy and when they're unhappy and draw conclusions from that. We know happiness exists because we can observe it in ourselves and other people.

[Anonymous No.14352556]

>>14352546
Please elaborate on what this "truth" is, and why you believe this discussion is one-sided and somehow violent.

[Anonymous No.14352567]

>>14352541
The left is not happy. These are deeply unhappy people.
>secretly longing for strong whites to kill them
Then why are you both savagely envious of what those people built while at the same time blaming them for all your problems? Taken as a whole it/you/the left look like a child who desperately wants to be told 'no' and put back in your place.

[Anonymous No.14352568]

>>14352555
But it's not quantifiable so how can you judge that deporting immigrants won't bring more overall happiness than letting immigrants stay?
Also, how happy someone will be from either of these scenarios will be completely dependent on the person themselves so is emotional "happiness" as a metric not therefore useless as a basis for logical arguments?

[Anonymous No.14352579]

>>14352545
Law and order enforced by force is only justifiable when the order you're enforcing is preferable to the disorder needed to create a more favourable order.
>>14352552
anti-democratic, authoritarian, ethnic nationalists
>>14352554
Projection.

[Anonymous No.14352587]

>>14352552
>‘Fascist’
"racist"
etc.
Is what you get called if you dare question modern Leftism. Leftism became a religion at some point.

[Anonymous No.14352594]

>>14352567
The moral character of a person is irrelevant in a discussion about the truth of their political claims.
>>14352568
In the real world, people have to make decisions with imperfect information. This part for the course if you want to do politics. This is a valid critique but not a serious one.

[Anonymous No.14352597]

>>14352579
>authoritarian
The irony is that is what the Left wants most of all, a one world order that enforces their views. Leftists are the "useful idiots" of the Globalist Elite who want to commodify human beings and prevent them from organizing against them.

[Anonymous No.14352602]

>>14352597
I don't see how this is related to your earlier question you wanted a definition of what I consider a fascist and you got it. Someone who's an ethnic nationalist, authoritarian and anti-democratic.

[Anonymous No.14352608]

>>14352602
Different anon, you got multiple (You)s, good for you

[Anonymous No.14352611]

>>14352608
My apologies.

[Anonymous No.14352614]

>>14352602
>ethnic nationalist, authoritarian and anti-democratic.

That describes every nation state outside of the west. That describes immigrant groups. Are they fascists too?

[Anonymous No.14352620]

If they want to establish a nation-state for an ethnic group that is designed to look after the interests of this ethnic group and privilege that group at the expense of everyone else? Yes.

[Anonymous No.14352625]

>>14352579
>when the order you're enforcing is preferable to the disorder needed to create a more favourable order.
Rule of law creates real authority and and cements the legitimacy of the state. That alone creates a mindset of compliance and reform instead of revolution. Cutting off the nose to spite the face can be fully acceptable when it works in service of the greater goal of the foundational stability of society and isn't unholistically concerned with the specific nature of the transgression and punishment itself. A dystopian order people recognize as legitimate is preferable to any lukewarm pseudo-anarchy because creating such an image in the minds of the people requires competent statecraft, which necessitates having quite a few more positive qualities than negative ones (most of which are relative to worldview) where it not for the divide between its talented engineers and incompetent rhetoricians, the neo-liberal world order would be in shambles.

[Anonymous No.14352634]

>>14347396
or, you know, large, diverse, cosmopolitan cities will collapse in on themselves and new ones will eventually rise from the ashes, while homogenous rural dwellers remain comfy and unchanged, as has been the case for pretty much all of recorded history.

[Anonymous No.14352639]

>>14352625
An order is only justifiable if it does more good than bad to people. Therefore cementing the legitimacy of a state is only moral if the order that you're cementing causes more good than harm. Law and order is a means and has to be justified as such.

[Anonymous No.14352648]

>>14350749
That was the best essay in the book

[Anonymous No.14352653]

>>14352440
Never met a fash basher who wasn’t entirely incapable of any real conflict. It’s all fash bash and punch nazis until the shit hits the fan, then you’re all niggers who scuttle about like cockroaches once the real men finally decide to take action and curb stomp you en masse.

[Anonymous No.14352660]

>>14347584
This is true. Disregard at your own peril.

[Anonymous No.14352664]

>>14352653
Neat anecdote. It doesn't call into question the truth value of my normative claim "fash bashing is okay" tho :^)

[Anonymous No.14352670]

>>14352639
>n order is only justifiable if it does more good than bad to people
Utilitarianism is a worthless frankenstein basis that has all its gears moving randomly and creating jams.

The "more good than bad" is mostly political lens (when a legitimate state is excellent at making it's own the norm) I'm referring to how these qualities lead to competent statecraft, efficient in crafting the society is sets out to create and having it run smoothly. I believe the existential understanding that the world you live it has legitimate authority is an important moral attribute, as when this isn't the case, it fosters a spirit of rebellion , and rebellious spirits need to remain forever revolutionary and chaotic to sustain themselves and their goals. The commies and french went into depth with this and called for eternal revolution, and lamented that they couldn't figure out a way to make it work and have a functioning society to exist alongside it.

Authority and rule of law is moral for its own sake as a concept. Even if applied imperfectly it's better to be draconic than illegitimate.

[Anonymous No.14352684]

>>14347614
>moar civilian deaths good
so this is the power of Caesarism...

[Anonymous No.14352690]

>>14352670
One cannot argue someone out of an axiomatic position because they weren't convinced of it by anything and thus nothing can convince them out of it. If you axiomatically value law and order for its own sake there is no point in this discussion. It would be as fruitless as you trying to argue me out of my belief in the law of non contradiction.

[Anonymous No.14352698]

>>14347366
Please tell me what you think of the 8 page essay I rushed about it for my sociolinguistics class my freshman year of uni https://pastebin.com/NSukewLm

[Anonymous No.14352714]

>>14352690
I hope you don't confuse the impractical approach of arguing against internally consistent beliefs with it being impossible. The discussion would just have to spam a wide array of topics.

>my belief in the law of non contradiction.
Then you may want to take another look at the basis of utilitarianism and how it promotes frankenstien ideologies because it only takes problems as they come and doesn't even have a reliable system to measure what is "more good than bad for the people" Such utilitarianism could just as well use antithetical lens to judge two separate problems, using contradictory principles to judge the more good than bad. You can see this often employed in neo-liberal society when it comes to principles like consent as a basis for justification, it becomes incoherent when the consent principle facilitates things the rest of it finds to be an anathema.

[Anonymous No.14352733]

>>14352690
keep in mind the whole point of this discussion was to show that is it possible for the priority of rule of law to be a coherent political position. What's the point of a state if it can't engage in statecraft? Obviously is preferable (although as I alluded to likely not psychologically) for a state you disagree with to be ineffective in exerting it's will, but the principle applied to the concept of a state itself is horrible.There will always be dissent no matter what measurement of rationality you use. Kant went over this in his critique of pure reason. There is no philosophy without the art of ignoring objections.

[Anonymous No.14352734]

>>14352714
It literally is impossible to argue someone out of an axiom because an axiom isn't believed due to an argument which you can critique. There is nothing to attack.

Utilitarianism defines good as pleasure, wellbeing etc and bad as pain, discomfort etc.
Actions have consequences. These consequences can't be contradictory. An action can't create more Pleasure than Pain while at the same time causing more Pain than Pleasure. Using this as a standard utilitarianism cannot give more than one moral judgement on an action. Therefore it's impossible for utilitarianism to contradict itself.

[Anonymous No.14352742]

>>14352733
A state isn't an end in of itself. It has to justify its existence as does the kind of statecraft it pushes.
If you can prove that ignoring a law or overthrowing a state will cause more good than bad overtime then you should do it.

[Anonymous No.14352781]

>>14352734
>because an axiom isn't believed due to an argument which you can critique
It's believed due to an entire worldview of many arguments. It's impractical but not impossible. You would have to go through the trouble of actually getting to know the person and not symbolic transgressions of gay debate.

>Therefore it's impossible for utilitarianism to contradict itself.
utilitarianism is a tool. It's a tool that enables contradictions in a persons whole worldview because it never considers anything outside of the current problem it's trying to solve and the measurement standards can be wildly different. "Pleasure and pain" can't actually be measured without a political lens. Utilitarianism that pretends this isn't the case is scientism.

>If you can prove that ignoring a law or overthrowing a state will cause more good than bad
You can't without a revolutionary lens, and a competent state that you recognize the authority of as legitimate prevents this type of thinking. When you see the FBI as men in black suits conducting all kinds of confidential tasks with expert efficiency instead of a bunch of drunk spinsters shitposting about trump on twitter you are far more inclined to seek reform rather than overthrow. Revolution is always shit and it's bad liberals fetishize it because the revolution is never truly over. It's only when it dies that something else takes over the ruins of the old system which inevitably has little in common with what the revolutionaries intended.

Administrators capable of good statecraft (regardless of the philosophical basis) are better than incompetent idealists who could never bring their own, or any other state into reality, which is what you get with revolutionaries.

[Anonymous No.14352792]

>>14352781
>which is what you get with revolutionaries.
and what we current have with neo-liberalism and what a collapse is justified. The engineering side of the current world order is very competent, the actual political-administrative side is a joke. it could never implement correct or "greatest good" policies if it actually had good intentions or intentions outside of neo-liberalism.

[Anonymous No.14352797]

>>14352781
There is a fundamental misunderstanding here. When I say Axiom I mean a proposition that is believed without any justification in the form of other premises. If you believe a proposition due to an argument it's a conclusion not an axiom.

Pain and Pleasure are feelings. If you hit me it will hurt no matter what my beliefs on politics are. Someone who doesn't even have political propositions they believe are true can feel both pain and pleasure. These are completely apolitical. Which of course makes sense since they're the foundations of ethics which must come before politics.

The intentions of the revolutionary is irrelevant if his revolution has caused a chain of consequence that created more pleasure than pain than would otherwise have existed that was a good revolution.

[Anonymous No.14352809]

>>14352734
>An action can't create more Pleasure than Pain while at the same time causing more Pain than Pleasure.
Why the fuck not?
How much pleasure you derive from an action depends on the neurochemical state of your brain at the time of having said experience.
A person might be overjoyed from finding a half-eaten McDonalds thrown into the trash whilst another person will not feel anything from it, depending on their circumstances.
When you punch someone, you might feel great from punching a retard in the face and the retard might feel extreme pain, or you might just be punching them in fear of your safety and only feel pain from bruising your fist whilst the assailant is used to getting punched and doesn't feel that much pain at all.
Your assumption that certain actions will always elicit a certain reaction in every circumstance is simply wrong.

[Anonymous No.14352833]

>>14352797
Axioms are held by the user due to arguments, they are given to others as a general truth for efficiencies sake. Regardless it's very disingenuous to actually try and pass off that I simply claimed rule of law is good in itself and left it at that. I have provided multiple arguments and examples for why this is the case.

>his revolution has caused a chain of consequence that created more pleasure than pain
And how would you ever go about using utilitarianism as a means of measuring this to justify the revolution until after the fact? I already outlined the typical situation where revolution just ends up taking down one state and replacing it with a totally new one after all the chaos (itself a hell of a lot of pain) that isn't in line with the rational aims of revolutionaries. it's a gamble. it just gives revolutionaries the authority to throw shit at the wall and implement changes on a whim to see how good or bad things end up while taking it away from the state.

Utilitarianism is useless if it's just used with hindsight bias. It's supposed to be a tool to let you make a moral decision, not decide if something was moral after the fact.

[Anonymous No.14352836]

>>14352809
I never made such an assumption? You're strawmanning me. An action that affects people will cause these people to either feel more pleasure than pain or more pain than pleasure which determines the morality of the action. The same kind of action might have different outcomes when done to different people but that doesn't disprove utilitarianism. That just means that doing a kind of action to one person might be moral but to do the same kind of activity to another might be immoral.

[Anonymous No.14352847]

>>14352836
Right. If pleasure is the only "good" thing in the world, then why aren't you hooked up on heroin or some other drug 24/7 until you die?

[Anonymous No.14352864]

>>14352833
Utilitarianism isn't a tool. It's a normative claim about what makes an action moral and immoral. Practical ethics have to be built upon a theory of what makes actions good or evil and that's what utilitarianism is.

Also for the axiom thing no. An axiom is something you find self-evident that you believe without proof or justification. If you justify a proposition with an argument it's just a conclusion not an axiom. My axiom "A cannot be B and not B at the same time" the law of non-contradiction isn't something I believe because of an argument it's a self evident truth an axiomatic belief.

[Anonymous No.14352868]

>>14352847
because of subjective measurement systems and rationalizations that such a lifestyle actually creates more pain by being unfulfilling or whatever (and opening up another can of worms of people not knowing what's for their own good) utilitarianism has always been junk because it can never even define pleasure or pain adequately, let alone measure them accurately. Pleasure and pain end up having such broad and relative meanings and interpretations that they are meaningless terms. utilitarianism can get you whatever result you want.

[Anonymous No.14352871]

>>14352847
I have several responsibilities toward other people which if left unattended would cause a lot more pain and misery than any ecstasy that I personally might experience. Utiliterianism isnt' egoism.

[Anonymous No.14352876]

>>14352868
Nonsense. Just because we can't perfectly explain happiness and suffering. Doesn't mean we don't know that happiness and suffering exist and that increasing happiness and decreasing happiness isn't good.

[Anonymous No.14352877]

>>14352864
>It's a normative claim about what makes an action moral and immoral
It's a tool to discover if something is moral or immoral. If you claim pleasure and pain as the basis for morality you have to measure the pleasure and pain to see if something is moral or immoral. This is why it's a tool and a shitty tool with all the issues I've mentioned and more. it's bad at doing its job. The reality of utilitarianism is that if you accept it's terms you can never really know if something is objectively moral or immoral.

[Anonymous No.14352889]

>>14352871
>>14352876
So we should just take a few years to mass-produce drugs until there's enough for everyone to hook up and overdose. Boom, everyone's "pleasure chemicals" go through the roof and the entire world population reaches unprecedented levels of pleasure with none of the percussions afterwards because everyone's dead. Thank me later virgins.

[Anonymous No.14352897]

>>14352877
It's not a tool. You're confusing utilitarianism with applied ethics. Utilitarianism tells you what makes an action good or evil. This allows you to build an applied ethic upon utilitarianism to make living up to the moral standards laid upon you by utilitarianism practical. Utilitarianism is not applied ethics.

[Anonymous No.14352898]

>>14352876
Happiness and pleasure don't mean the same thing. Utilitarianism runs into the issue of the terms being too broad. it ends up essentially saying "things are moral or immoral if they are good or bad which is essentially saying moral or immoral things are moral and immoral. Depending on the situation it's applied to, what exactly pleasure and pain means changes wildly, and that's not even considering the analysis personal lens (which should come from other coherent ethical systems of right and wrong and not the shallow scientism of utilitarianism.)

[Anonymous No.14352903]

Savez-vous ce qu'est la déterritorialisation?

[Anonymous No.14352904]

>>14352889
If everyone dies. Then the universe caused by such an action is one where happiness ceases to exist within one generation of blissful hedonists. All the happiness that could have been experienced by all the future generations is never experienced.

[Anonymous No.14352908]

>>14347366
I don't know of any books but I was thinking recently how insane it is that blacks live among us at all. A great deal of American culture amounts to a brainwashing program to make people tolerant of negroes. It's like one of those sci-fi stories where space aliens hypnotized people into not noticing them.

[Anonymous No.14352909]

>>14352898
Pleasure and Pain are not broad concepts.

[Anonymous No.14352914]

>>14352904
So you have to consider pleasure levels infinitely into the future?
What's the cutoff?

Also, you're missing another fact which is that all the misery of the future generations would not be experienced either. People are arguably more miserable than happy so we'd be doing them a favour by offing ourselves.

[Anonymous No.14352918]

>>14352909
Then tell us how to numerically quantify levels of pleasure and pain in a person.

[Anonymous No.14352926]

>>14352914
Yes. If it helps you visualize what I mean more easily think of pleasure as income and of pain as expenses. The goal is to make as much money as possible.

[Anonymous No.14352928]

>>14352926
See >>14352918

[Anonymous No.14352930]

>>14352909
>he says after already conflating the concept of pleasure with happiness which do in fact tackle very different theoretical realm. What feels good might not make you happy. How does a neutral response even factor into the equation?

Utilitarianism Is useless in practicality and shallow and incoherent in principle. It gets refuted in undergrad philosophy classes. Consider taking one.

[Anonymous No.14352932]

>>14348997
basatus
et
ruberpillulatus

[Anonymous No.14352935]

>>14352918
If we're not able to do that we have to try and approximate as much as possible. Just because our understanding of pleasure and pain aren't perfect doesn't mean pleasure and pain shouldn't inform our moral decisions. It just means we're not working with perfect information which is to be expected in any political or ethical endeavour.

[Anonymous No.14352938]

>>14347564
>>14348726
Not him.
It's a quote from the Hesse novel Steppenwolf. Great book, but taking this out of context quote uttered by a fictitious character at face value reveals how much of uncultured swines most of you people really are. Dear prudence...

[Anonymous No.14352940]

>>14352930
This isn't an argument lel.

[Anonymous No.14352963]

>>14352935
How is this any different from theocracy?
You're basing values and morality on arbitrary subjective experiences of human beings.

[Anonymous No.14352967]

>>14352930
The real purpose of utilitarianism is obstructionism, so nothing can get done. Literally no one has ever even managed to show it used effectively in the fucking trolley problem.

>>14352940
>I don't know what an argument is
i've made enough arguments, especially in response to a simple statement with no justification of "n-no it's not a broad concept after you showed examples of how it is" as if the nature of it being relative to the individuals interpretation didn't make it impossibly broad in the first place.

I'm not using the consensus that it's a shit system and this is taught in undergrad is an argument, i'm using it to make fun of you. Nobody but midwits who never actually thought about utilitarianism thinks it's a good system, because it sounds reasonable on paper (it's very easy to understand after all, real moral systems require a lot of actual work and real comprehension) but doesn't hold up to any scrutiny.

[Anonymous No.14352969]

>>14352963
I don't see how it relates to theocracy? maybe you could elucidate and make theocracy look better in my eyes.

[Anonymous No.14352971]

>>14352938
cringelord

[Anonymous No.14352974]

>>14352967
I found your other arguments unconvincing if you're done making them we're done here.

[Anonymous No.14352985]

>>14352969
I just used theocracy as an example.
They both base values on unquantifiable, unmeasurable, unproven ideas and experiences and just says that it's what's "good".
Why is pleasure "good" and pain "bad"?
On what basis have you concluded these two things which the rest of your ideas are based on?

[Anonymous No.14352993]

>>14352985
Oh, it's an axiom. I'm a foundationalist. That's my answer to the Münchhausen trilemma. I have a set of self-evident beliefs from which I can reason my way up to other beliefs. The law of non-contradiction. The principle of utility. Empiricism. etc

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnchhausen_trilemma

[Anonymous No.14352994]

>>14347729
>ethnically cleanse them
I'm glad we agree that this is the next and only logical step.
I look forward to seeing you on the day of the rope

[Anonymous No.14352999]

>>14352994
More like day of the cope cause it's never gonna come and you're just whispering it into each other's ears to make yourselves feel better.

[Anonymous No.14353006]

>>14352993
Doesn't that just mean that nothing can convince you out of believing in your fundamental assumptions/assertions?

[Anonymous No.14353018]

>>14353006
Yes. I mentioned this above too>>14352734
I suppose since I hold to the law of non-contradiction proving that 2 of my axioms lead to contradictory conclusions could work but apart from that, yeah these are my fundamental assumptions about reality. Are you not a foundationalist yourself?

[Anonymous No.14353026]

>>14353018
I guess I am, but "pleasure good, pain bad" is a little too big of an assumption to make in the first place. Don't you think it's more nuanced than that?

[Anonymous No.14353045]

>>14353026
Well, I believe all morality has to come from an axiom. Because of the is-ought gap can't get an ought from an is. I cannot reason my way up from descriptive claims to normative claims I need a starting point.
And if we're talking about nuance. Your moral axioms cannot lead to contradictory conclusions. If one were to exemplify this with two silly axioms: the moral axioms "you should eat" and "you shouldn't eat" cannot both be true at the same time. Therefore any axiom(s) you use to draw moral conclusions is probably not going to be overly complex because having too many axiomatic values would probably imply contradictory conclusions. Therefore simplicity in your axioms is important.

[Anonymous No.14353064]

>>14353045
Well, everyone needs to have presuppositions in order to be sure of anything (I guess except for experiencing itself) so I agree with you there.
On the other hand, a simple assertion like "pleasure good, pain bad" without nuance leaves no room for exceptions like when it involves the factor of the future. It's impossible to even guess how much "good" will come out of action because there are infinite circumstantial factors involved in the future. Wouldn't it be better, then, to have an assertion which doesn't involve an unsolvable moral question?

[Anonymous No.14353073]

>>14353064
Uncertainty about the future just means you're working with imperfect information and you should act in the way you can reasonably expect to deliver the best outcomes. If you want moral certainty you could try deontology. Which bases the morality of an action in the action itself irrespective of the consequences of the action. Therefore allowing you certainty.

[Anonymous No.14353078]

>>14353064
Also: I think therefore I am. Still requires you to prove that you're thinking. So it still requires a presupposition ( my perceived experiences are real).

[Anonymous No.14353086]

>>14352149
I don't know if you keep up with reality, but Christian parents are doing the same thing, only nationwide. Sexual education recently became punishable by 3 years of prison in Poland, due to our Christian government

[Anonymous No.14353088]

>>14353073
Well, your values seem sound. Good chat anon.
Are you the same anon that said this >>14352440 ?

[Anonymous No.14353093]

>>14353088
That was indeed me.

[Anonymous No.14353099]

>>14353093
Out of interest, would you condone bashing commies if they were advocating to kill the "bourgeoise" and take their factories and all that jazz?

[Anonymous No.14353121]

>>14353099
Same thing. Socialists require less violence to be dealt with though since their enemy the bourgeoisie is such an incredibly small minority of society and their activism mostly peaceful. While nazis even though they might not win power might decide to take direct action against minorities which are a lot more numerous and less well guarded than the bourgeoisie.

[Anonymous No.14353124]

>>14353099
I'm not in favour of bashing all nazis btw. Violence against fascists is a means to avoid fascism and targets have to be picked according to that goal. The random /pol/tard isn't much of a threat to anyone. Richard Spencer on the other hand...

[Anonymous No.14353130]

>>14353121
>>14353124
Fair enough.

[Anonymous No.14353141]

>>14347396
Or you know, people are born with in-group bias and this was destined to happen ever since we started importing nogs and sandniggers

[Anonymous No.14353154]

>>14353141
Proof, please.

[Anonymous No.14353181]

>>14353141
>racial categories invented in the last few centuries are somehow innate

[Anonymous No.14353278]

>>14353154
>>14353181
>https://www.explorepsychology.com/ingroup-bias/
Sorry I have to much work to search for any relevant study, but I wasnt trying to say that people split themselves among racial lines per se. Tribalism makes sense from evolutionary standpoint because not sticking with your own tribe increased the chances you getting killed and thereby not spreading your genes. So we have even neurochemical mechanisms that regulate that.
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6347450/
Right now we have enough of bread and circus combined with self-segregation to keep everyone in line, but when shit hits the fan people are going to split themselves in various groups competing for limited resources, and it wont be meme groups like liberals/conservatives. National identity is also pretty irrelevant at this point, so it makes sense to assume grouping will be made primarly by visual cues, like skin color and other race-specific phenotypical traits.
Also, it would be preferable if it happened sooner than later, since europeans are losing demographic advantage

[Anonymous No.14353541]

>>14347584
very true, to simply question this dogma is incredibly taboo here in sweden