/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.20504599]

>dude, Christian morals are a spook! xD The will to power is all that counts!
>w-what? You want to rob and murder me? W-why?! Don't you have morals?! AAAAAH police heeeeelp!

[Anonymous No.20504625]

>>20504599
>Gets thrown in jail and raped by niggers
Guess your will to power was too weak Christcuck.

[Anonymous No.20504676]

>>20504599
>Well you see, morality is real, it's just a contract between the individuals with which you share a dialogue. You, sir, are violating the discursive framework with which we have built the grounds of a very rational and very real form of morality.
>Sorry I don't share a dialogue with you. 《BLAM》

[Anonymous No.20504811]

>dude, Jesus Christ is LAWD!
>The Bible is literally flawless and everyone on the planet has to follow it by the letter!
>wait what, that includes me too? And I have to give away all my STUFF TO THE POORS?!!!! METAPHOR INTERPRETATION CONTEXT LALALALA I DONT NEED TO DO THIS ONLY THE LE BASED STUFF IS TRUE LALALALALA

[Anonymous No.20504837]

>>20504811
Mind citing where it says to do that?

[Anonymous No.20504850]

>>20504837
"Jesus told him, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow Me." - Matthew 19:21

[Anonymous No.20504851]

I don’t think Nietzsche would be terrified of robbery or murder, and would probably wryly answer you that plenty of robbers and murderers are Christians and think of how the police will burn in hell. He wrote some interesting thoughts about criminals, I forget in which work, about outcasts who are at odds with social mores but not necessarily with the power or vision to establish a new order or try to

[Anonymous No.20504854]

>>20504811
Idk why but soijacks just don’t work with Christianity, it fits way more with atheism.

[Anonymous No.20504861]

>>20504850
But it’s impossible to be perfect, therefore I’m not selling shit. Also Jesus meant to literally physically follow him. He’s not around anymore for me to follow.

[Anonymous No.20504862]

>>20504837
>amerikikes dont even read the book they claim to worship

[Anonymous No.20504866]

>>20504854
its because Christ is the truth and atheism is dog shit for niggers and jews.

[Anonymous No.20504868]

>>20504861
Cool, nice copout, and enjoy hell

[Anonymous No.20504876]

>>20504854
Not really, since most Christians are faggot larpers

[Anonymous No.20504895]

>>20504868
How is that a copout? You criticized Christians for taking too many metaphorical interpretations, yet when I take a literal interpretation it’s still a bad thing? Make up your mind.

[Anonymous No.20504898]

>>20504599
Will to Power have nothing to do with being a sperg. Most of stuff is will to power according to Nietzsche, even christian morals themselves. Too bad he became mentally retarded exactly by the time he wrote his Will to Power stuff.

[Anonymous No.20504901]

>>20504850
Oh right, now lets see the context.
>Behold, one came to him and said, “Good teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?”
>He said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good but one, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”
>He said to him, “Which ones?” Jesus said, “‘You shall not murder.’ ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ ‘You shall not steal.’ ‘You shall not offer false testimony.’
>‘Honor your father and your mother.’ And, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’”
Hmm, I don't see an order to give up everything in there, and yet Jesus himself said this would lead into life.
>The young man said to him, “All these things I have observed from my youth. What do I still lack?”
>Jesus said to him, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”
>But when the young man heard this, he went away sad, for he was one who had great possessions.
Oh there it is, a comment given to an individual young rich man whose vanity blinds him to his own flaws and proudly claims to follow the commandments to a T while heckling Christ about how to guarantee his way into Heaven. Pretty funny how your bait collapses when context is given.

[Anonymous No.20504907]

>>20504861
If he only meant for people alive to follow him why would he have talked about abolishing the old law, forgiving all future mankind their sins, and preaching the word to disciples that were told to go out and make converts and spread the word. Lying kike

[Anonymous No.20504910]

>>20504895
Because you have none of tgese reservations when you're benefitting from a Bible verse, almost as if benefits, influence and power is what you're really after.

Which remind of this one concept by sone German philosopher, would you like to know which?

[Anonymous No.20504917]

>>20504599
The more I encounter these NEETCH threads the more I realize anyone engaging Nietszche (pro or anti doesnt matter) is a fucking retard.

[Anonymous No.20504918]

>>20504901
See? You act exactly like I said you would.

This is known as the famous 11th commandment, if I don't benefit or it's wrong, it was a metaphor all along

[Anonymous No.20504921]

>>20504599
Neetch made up will to power to counteract the anglobrained “survive and reproduce” imperative. He said that all life followed the will to power, Christians, democratists, socialists all practiced will to power just in an inverted form, that is, through slave morality

[Anonymous No.20504939]

>>20504599
>another /lit/eral retard thinks Nietzsche advocated Might makes Right
how can it be so difficult to just read some books from time to time? why do you come here?

[Anonymous No.20504946]

>>20504599
Neetcheeks life is the ultimate counter to his incel philosophy.

[Anonymous No.20504951]

>>20504946
*ultimate confirmation

[Anonymous No.20504957]

>>20504862
>asking for citation of chapter and verse so proper dialogue can be had is somehow a bad thing
>"amerikikes"
>"book they claim to worship"
Genuinely stupid and or bait written well enough to get a reply out of me.
>>20504918
>it was a metaphor all along
Right, this one is definitely bait, or care to point out where I claimed there is a metaphor?
He outright says to simply follow those commandments, and when asked what more to do by the rich kid to guarantee eternal life, only then does Jesus say to give up material stuff and follow.
I am not the young man he told to do that, I will take his first advice and strive my best to follow those commandments.

[Anonymous No.20504969]

>another thread for people who haven't read N to debate people who didn't understand him about whether it is based and redpilled to agree with him or not

[Anonymous No.20504990]

>>20504861
>But it’s impossible to be perfect, therefore I’m not selling shit.
Jesus is speaking about an extra-obligatory virtue here, like celibacy. Holy poverty is a very real and tangible thing which you can persue right now, and many have in the past, chief is of course Francis of Assi. It isn't a necessary thing, which is obvious in the context this passage is taken from:
>Jesus replied, “You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, honor your father and mother, and love your neighbor as yourself." “All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”
To which Jesus replies "If you want to be perfect". Nonetheless, poverty is superior to comfort and wealth even if it is not necessary and it would be good practice for the Christian to distance himself from the love of things, and to embrace poverty to a certain extent (just as restraint and chastity should be observed even within marriage, such as by refraining on certain days).
>Also Jesus meant to literally physically follow him. He’s not around anymore for me to follow.
There are many ways to serve and follow Christ even though He no longer walks among us. In the sense of physically following around, you can uproot yourself to go whereever the will of God wants you in the same way His original followers left home and hearth to follow Jesus as He went from town to town preaching and working wonders. An instance of this were the mendicant orders of the Catholic Church.

[Anonymous No.20505016]

>>20504990
huh?

[Anonymous No.20505073]

>>20504957
>Right, this one is definitely bait, or care to point out where I claimed there is a metaphor?

My friend, do you understand what a figure of speech is? I thought you people believed the atheists to be autists, yet this is next level autism

My point is this: when it comes to Bible verses that you benefit from (for instance, the ones that condemn homosexuality and tell you that women shouldn't open their mouths) we get zero reservations and everything is supposed to be taken at face value, without any considerations for context, nuance, when this was written and by whom (for instance, there are zero verses in the Gospels about homosexuality), yet when a Bible verse that you don't benefit from is given to you, out come flying the most sea lawyery excuses about context, nuance and interpretations. When you don't benefit, suddenly quoting the entire chapter isn't enough and we need to give every possible translation, retranslation, interpretation and re-re-reinterpretation before you're even going to consider following a book that you insist everyone on the planet must follow to perfection.

All of this tells me you're a gigantic fraud, you don't believe in any of this, and I need not take seriously a single word you say

[Anonymous No.20505104]

>>20504599
>>w-what? You want to rob and murder me? W-why?! Don't you have morals?! AAAAAH police heeeeelp!
I'm skimming through Nietzsche's works right now but I can't find this passage, can you point me to where it is?

[Anonymous No.20505127]

>>20505073
>excuses about context, nuance and interpretations
It's called pilpul and it's a most venerable and ancient tradition among Abrahamic theologians. Try to look at it from his perspective: if you made a contract with a volcano demon who will roast you alive eternally for crossing him, you have to be absolutely sure you are in compliance at all times, and to that end, must be able to defend yourself in astral court against potential charges of breach of contract. Thus, for every order handed down in the covenants, or testaments, which you do not follow, you must have a reasonable explanation. It's not actually hypocrisy—this pilpuling is nothing less than the chief requirement of the religion, which itself sets about negating everything else such that the only way to live is to do what is negated but justify it in terms of what is commanded.

[Anonymous No.20505198]

>>20504850
>If you want to be perfect
He also praises at least one soldier as an example of someone that will go to heaven.

[Anonymous No.20505209]

>>20505198
Then I take it you don't want to go to heaven?

[Anonymous No.20505226]

>>20505209
16Just then a man came up to Jesus and inquired, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to obtain eternal life?”

17“Why do you ask Me about what is good?”e Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

18“Which ones?” the man asked.

Jesus answered, “‘Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not bear false witness, 19honor your father and mother, and love your neighbor as yourself.’f”

20“All these I have kept,” said the young man. “What do I still lack?”

21Jesus told him, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow Me.”

[Anonymous No.20505238]

>>20505226
And do you want to be perfect or not?

[Anonymous No.20505255]

>>20505209
You're incoherent, the question makes no sense as a reply to my post. According to Jesus the humble soldier will go to heaven through faith despite killing in the name of Rome. If he was more attached to his duties than his faith that might be a different story. Same with wealth.
I don't know what will happen, we're supposedly talking about what the Bible communicates not what I think but you're not really trying. I trust whatever God has planned for me is right and good.

[Anonymous No.20505278]

>>20505238
Are you saying you wouldn't consider someone who is able to give everything to the poor as "better" than someone that doesn't? Despite not doing that no part of you wants to be better? You don't value good things?

[Anonymous No.20505297]

>>20505238
Me? I would personally not be opposed to imitating some sort of Franciscan poverty, no.

[Anonymous No.20505338]

>>20504599
The only useful morals in Christianity existed before it and come from polytheism. The stuff Christianity added developed into communism and Cultural Marxism and basically globohomo.

[Anonymous No.20505353]

>but muh what is good
According to the Bible here on earth basically the tree that bears fruit is good. Basically nature selects what is good as the instrument of God on earth.
This is well established as obviously true at the time of Christ so the NT doesn't focus on that which leads to confusion where pleb Christians sort of reject the natural world. You can't make the statements Christ makes from that ignorant perspective. There's no point to anything Christ says and does unless the tree that bears fruit is good.

[Anonymous No.20505365]

>>20505338
There’s a whole book called Ressentment by Max Scheler about why this is wrong.

[Anonymous No.20505417]

>>20504990
So hypothetically speaking, a rich man with exceptional moral character according to the scriptures could enter the Kingdom of Heaven whereas in reality (and I’m speaking with the verse about the camel entering into the eye of the needle in mind here) most people who are wealthy likely came to attain and preserve their wealth through immoral means, right? If all of this is taken to be true, then why did the young man leave Jesus sorrowfully?

[Anonymous No.20505430]

>>20505417
Because above anything else, he valued money. If it came down to following who he believed to be the Lord or his money, he chose to walk away with his money.

[Anonymous No.20505483]

>>20505417
Yes all of that is right. Matthew 19:22 says: "But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions." Judging from the disciples later reaction, we might assume that the rich young man was perhaps also grieved because of the austerity of these words, but nonetheless he decided to be perfect.

[Anonymous No.20505486]

Nietzsche, "Law against Christianity," suppressed appendix to The Antichrist:

Given on the Day of Salvation, on the first day of the year one (-30 September 1888, according to the false calculation of time)

War to the death against vice: the vice is Christianity

First proposition. - Every type of anti-nature is a vice. The priest is the most vicious type of person: he teaches anti-nature. Priests are not to be reasoned with, they are to be locked up.

Second proposition. - Any participation in church services is an attack on public morality. One should be harsher with Protestants than with Catholics, harsher with liberal Protestants than with orthodox ones. The criminality of being Christian increases with your proximity to science. The criminal of criminals is consequently the philosopher.

Third proposition. - The execrable location where Christianity brooded over its basilisk eggs should be razed to the ground and, being the depraved spot on earth, it should be the horror of all posterity. Poisonous snakes should be bred on top of it.

Fourth proposition. - The preacher of chastity is a public incitement to anti-nature. Contempt for sexuality, making it unclean with the concept of 'uncleanliness', these are the real sins against the holy spirit of life.

Fifth proposition. - Eating at the same table as a priest ostracizes: you are excommunicated from honest society. The priest is our Chandala, - he should be ostracized, starved, driven into every type of desert.

Sixth proposition. - The 'holy' history should be called by the name it deserves, the accursed history; the words 'God', 'saviour', 'redeemer', 'saint' should be used as terms of abuse, to signify criminals.

Seventh proposition. - The rest follows from this.

[Anonymous No.20505511]

>>20505486
2edgy4me
>In 1846 Carl Ludwig described his son in a letter:[3]
>Brother Fritz is a wild boy, who can sometimes be controlled only by his Papa, inasmuch as the "rod" is never far from him; but now someone else helps more powerfully, and that is the dear Holy Christ, who has already taken hold of even little Fritz by head and heart, so that he wants to hear and speak of nothing but the heile Kist ["Holy Ghost"] - it's something very sweet.

[Anonymous No.20505542]

>>20504599
Why do you keep making this low-effort threads?

[Anonymous No.20505578]

Is the tree of Christianity that produces such varied colorful fruit as Nietzsche not a beloved ancient giant?
The curses of the "antichrist" only make the tree stronger like predicted in the Bible and by walrus boy himself.

[Anonymous No.20505620]

>>20505486
>Given on the Day of Salvation, on the first day of the year one (-30 September 1888, according to the false calculation of time)
Lmao I can't believe this is real.

[Anonymous No.20505641]

>>20505226
So Jesus was a hobo looking for followers, told people to get rid of their stuff and go with him and people 2000 years later think they have to do it too so they can go to heaveb

Trippy shit

[Anonymous No.20505684]

>>20504599
christian morality just boils down to whether or not you want to defend niggers. your entire strawman argument was created because nietzsche made you feel uncomfortable about it

>>20504854
the average christcuck loves niggers. cope

>>20504898
>Nietzsche became mentally retarded
>trust me dude, I'm some guy on /lit/ who might even be a shitskin

[Anonymous No.20506077]

>>20505578
>is the tree of Christianity that produces such varied colorful fruit as Nietzsche not a beloved ancient giant?
what

[Anonymous No.20506090]

>The world is full of psychopaths and narcissistic people?
>NOO, you can't just describe the world the way it is
>MORALS ARE OBJECTIVE
>The world is full of bad people and egoism?
>WELL IT OUGHT TO BE DIFFERENT!!

[Anonymous No.20506093]

>>20504946
No, if anything it just makes him even more based.He might have been a poor, sick, weak human being but still wasn't afraid to accept the truth that strength = good even if this meant accepting that he was a fuck up. Meanwhile what most people in shitty situations do, as you can see everywhere, is make up cope about how they're "morally superior" because "i-i-i-i'm not a fuck up failure i'm just humble" or some shit (slave morality).

"The weak and botched shall perish". Nietzsche perished because he was weak and botched, this fact doing not but confirm everything he said about might as truth.

[Anonymous No.20506199]

>>20504599
I say this and I look like this

[Anonymous No.20506237]

>>20504599
Can we just ban /qa/tards already?

[Anonymous No.20506288]

>>20505073
>Wall of text unrelated to the chapter and verse in discussion
Lol, nothing to say that's on topic?
It's okay to admit you're wrong, if anything it'd look better in this situation than trying to distract from it as a cope.

[Anonymous No.20506556]

>>20505073
>CHRISTFAGS CLAIM VERSES ARE METAPHORS REEEEE
>uh, yeah man, of course my post was ackshually obviously a metaphor now that you've refuted it so let's talk about something else instead now.
keep it together dude we can't BTFO christoids if you bait so sloppily, Neech would be ashamed

[Anonymous No.20506736]

>>20506093
Exactly. When Nietzsche talks about strength=good, he's not claiming to be strong. He's just claiming a truth. I've seen all of my strong friends go on to do amazing things with their lives. Meanwhile, my weak friends (passive, non-confrontational, brain is a labyrinth of excuses, don't take responsibility) have become complete penniless losers. They cling to shit like socialism and Buddhism to make themselves feel better about themselves, but the fact of the matter is that it's pure delusion.

[Anonymous No.20506983]

>>20504861
retard

[Anonymous No.20507292]

>>20506077
>what
Is the tree of Christianity that produces such varied colorful fruit as Nietzsche not a beloved ancient giant?

[Anonymous No.20507410]

>>20504901
holy cope lmao

[Anonymous No.20507426]

>>20506736
Nietzsche wasn't talking about the stuff you guys think he was talking about and didn't have an ounce of ill feeling toward himself. He thought men ought to face and deal with their world instead of run from it which is what Christianity and modernism seemed to be doing to them.

[Anonymous No.20508308]

>>20504599
Is there a purpose to this thread?

[Anonymous No.20508314]

>>20508308
Christcucks coping and seething. Like they always do

[Anonymous No.20508327]

>>20504599 >>20504625 >>20504676 >>20504811 >>20504837 >>20504850 >>20504851 >>20504854 >>20504861 >>20504862 >>20504866 >>20504868 >>20504876 >>20504895 >>20504898 >>20504901 >>20504907 >>20504910 >>20504917 >>20504918 >>20504921 >>20504939 >>20504946 >>20504951 >>20504957 >>20504969 >>20504990 >>20505016 >>20505073 >>20505104 >>20505127 >>20505198 >>20505209 >>20505226 >>20505238 >>20505255 >>20505278 >>20505297 >>20505338 >>20505353 >>20505365 >>20505417 >>20505430 >>20505483 >>20505486 >>20505511 >>20505542 >>20505578 >>20505620 >>20505641 >>20505684 >>20506077 >>20506090 >>20506093 >>20506199 >>20506237 >>20506288 >>20506556 >>20506736 >>20506983 >>20507292 >>20507410 >>20507426 >>20508308 >>20508314
If you don't believe in morals then there's literally nothing wrong with being a massive hypocrite and acting like you believe in morals only when it happens to benefit you.
Name one complaint against lack of moral integrity that isn't grounded in the presumption that morals are a real thing in the first place.
Literally absolutely zero wrong with being a manipulative goalpost-moving scumbag

[Anonymous No.20508333]

>>20508327
>Name one complaint against lack of moral integrity that isn't grounded in the presumption that morals are a real thing in the first place.

The fact that they have real consequences?

[Anonymous No.20508342]

>>20508333
But why not just presume yourself immune to consequences, and then repeatedly prove yourself right?
You might end up proving yourself wrong and dying, but if you really don't believe in morals, you can't assign negative moral value to your own death, so what does it matter?

[Anonymous No.20508343]

Nietzsche would like you more if you tried to kill him for his views. Modern men are too spineless to try anything like that, all too weighed down by morals. Too human. Steven Pinker's threat to rape Nietzsche's sister is just as hollow, he would never do it except under the cover of night.

[Anonymous No.20508347]

>>20508342
Try it yourself, then

[Anonymous No.20508355]

>>20508347
That would be inconsistent with my own outlook since I believe in moral values.
Doesn't mean I can't defend not believing in moral values

[Anonymous No.20508371]

>>20508327
Based and Stirnerpilled

[Anonymous No.20508378]

>>20508355
Right, but what do you do with this knowledge in your own life? Do you actually act this out?

[Anonymous No.20508385]

It's sad these low effort shitposts define /lit/

[Anonymous No.20508388]

>>20508343
What is your opinion on extreme low-trust societies such as Brazil where you can get robbed in broad daylight or even stabbed randomly at night if you're not street smart (strong)?

[Anonymous No.20508412]

>>20508388
Low IQ and subhuman, the result of chaotic miscegenation and colonial mismanagement.

[Anonymous No.20508417]

>>20508412
That's a society that's not weighed down by morals tho

[Anonymous No.20508486]

>>20508327
>(if you deny abramic doctrines then there's) Literally absolutely zero wrong with being a manipulative goalpost-moving scumbag
..and then acting in that way, accumulating a log list of people with legit reasons to stab and hurt you because of your actions, then suffering the consequences for the rest of your life.

>morals
>moral integrity
doesn't really equate to actually living a virtuous life; there's plenty of religious people who do things that are stab worthy which they wouldn't otherwise be if they were truly legit.

[Anonymous No.20508491]

>>20508486
>..and then acting in that way, accumulating a log list of people with legit reasons to stab and hurt you because of your actions, then suffering the consequences for the rest of your life.
Yes, but if you really, truly don't believe in morals, at all, to any degree, then you assign no positive moral value to continuing your life, and no negative moral value to ending it

[Anonymous No.20508493]

"honor the gods and if you still have trouble then the blame is with those ones who weighed down the world with shame,"
Maximinus, Augustus.

[Anonymous No.20508504]

>>20508491
> if you really, truly don't believe in morals, at all, to any degree, then you assign no positive moral value to continuing your life, and no negative moral value to ending it
that is life though, that's where we all are - why would recognizing reality produce this kind of distress?

'fake'-morals is the problem really; even though most people seem to conflate 'morality' with virtue which it is an aspect of but is very small by comparison to it.

[Anonymous No.20508512]

>>20508491
I mean: the utilitarian argument to be nice to people because they'll help you out and owe you favors ad generally give you things, is better than the placid or disconnected view that most theology puts forward about 'why' you should be nice and helpful.

that's really my point

[Anonymous No.20508537]

>>20504599
>
ok guys i am gonna say it only once so listen carefully.
nieztsche was right in his criticism of ideologies like religion (every fucking religion is bad) socialism and fascism, and many philosophical doctrines in the sense that they try to give people some sense for their problems and that a "good" person is somebody who does what it wants with his life without receiving orders from a leader.
the problem is that niezstche was retarded and he didnt thought that psychos would use his philosphy in order to commit atrocities.
resume: nieztsche has some good ideas but dont take them too seriously (like all philosophy)
pd: english is not my native language

[Anonymous No.20508541]

>>20506090
>narcissistic
this word is so overused and wrongly used (mentally retarded and sociopathy)
BUT narcissus and the word narcosis both imply a person,
"living not in reality; acting out their dreams in reality (without thought for other people)"

in that sense, this:
>>The world is full of psychopaths and narcissistic people
makes all the difference.

[Anonymous No.20508546]

>>20504599
>>dude, Christian morals are a spook! xD
"Certain strong and dangerous instincts, like a love of enterprise, daring, desire for revenge, shiftiness, rapacity, desire for mastery, which up to this point not only were honoured in a sense useful to the community, under different names, of course, from those just chosen here, but had to be enormously inculcated and cultivated (because people constantly needed them for the dangers to the totality, against the enemies of that totality)—these are now strongly experienced as doubly dangerous—now that there is a lack of diversionary channels for them—and they are gradually abandoned, branded as immoral and slanderous. Now the opposing impulses and inclinations acquire moral honour. The herd instinct draws its conclusions, step by step. How much or how little something is dangerous to the community, dangerous to equality, in an opinion, in a condition and emotion, in a will, in a talent, that is now the moral perspective. Here also fear is once again the mother of morality. When the highest and strongest drives break out passionately and impel the individual far above and beyond the average and low level of the herd’s conscience, the feeling of commonality in the community is destroyed; its belief in itself, its spine, as it were, breaks: as a result people brand these very drives and slander them most of all. The high independent spirituality, the will to stand alone, even powerful reasoning, are experienced as a danger. Everything which lifts the individual up over the herd and creates fear of one’s neighbour from now on is called evil. The proper, modest, conforming faith in equality, the happy medium in desires take on the names of morality and honour. Finally, under very peaceful conditions, there is an increasing lack of opportunity and need to educate the feelings in strength and hardness. Now every severity, even in justice, begins to disrupt the conscience. A high and hard nobility and self-responsibility are almost an insult and awaken mistrust; “the lamb” and even more “the sheep” acquire respect."
(Beyond Good and Evil, #201)

[Anonymous No.20508558]

>>20508537
>the problem is that niezstche was retarded and he didnt thought that psychos would use his philosphy in order to commit atrocities.
It's more the case that Nietzce was purposefully libeled and never advocated the various things that his detractors said he said.

e.g. >>20499437 like this guy; great moral rationalist, best arguments for a virtuous life, but called out fake-religious types for being hypocrites and was libeled by them as if he was a deranged hedonist which people still believe about him

long story short: neitzche would've vomitted to find that people, a century later, considered him to be one of the prime "nazi influencers". nonsense.

I think he even explicitly rejected them, whatever they were, when he was alive as an old man. might be wrong about that though, if he was alive at that point or not.

obviously one thing,
>nieztsche was right in his criticism of ideologies like religion (every fucking religion is bad) socialism and fascism, and many philosophical doctrines in the sense that they try to give people some sense for their problems and that a "good" person is somebody who does what it wants with his life without receiving orders from a leader.
contradicts the other,
>he didnt thought that psychos would use his philosphy in order to commit atrocities.

[Anonymous No.20508568]

>>20508537
>he didnt thought that psychos would use his philosphy
"A people is nature’s detour to produce six or seven great men.—Yes, and then to get around them." (Beyond Good and Evil, #126)

"The ignorant, to be sure, the people—they are like a river on which a boat floateth along: and in the boat sit the estimates of value, solemn and disguised.
Your will and your valuations have ye put on the river of becoming; it betrayeth unto me an old Will to Power, what is believed by the people as good and evil.
It was ye, ye wisest ones, who put such guests in this boat, and gave them pomp and proud names—ye and your ruling Will!
Onward the river now carrieth your boat: it must carry it. A small matter if the rough wave foameth and angrily resisteth its keel!"

[Anonymous No.20508581]

>>20508327
Mass replying faggots need to be hung from a fucking tree with the strongest rope around

[Anonymous No.20508584]

>>20504866
Christ was a Jew and was only for Jews until a mentally ill Jew made him for non-Jews. You are a larper, as are all christians.

[Anonymous No.20508585]

"Happy is he who has discovered the Causes of Things, happy is he who has cast beneath his feet all fear (of doubt) and the noise (the clamor) of the all-devouring underworld (the baseless opinions of people)"
Virgil.

[Anonymous No.20508594]

>>20508584
>Christ was a Jew and was only for Jews
this is absolutely and entirely the case; and the only real way to see jesus as being equivalent to a positive social reformer - to understand the actual pits of the self-inflicted religiously self-imposed misery (and self-mutilation) of the judeans.

[Anonymous No.20508604]

>>20508584
>>20504866
isn't anybody curious about the Ancient Roman view of the Christians? That: where the Christian is an Atheist?

it follows: that not only does this death-cult outlook rely upon rampant disregard of the divine and sacred aspects of things in the world; the ancient paths of people of differing walks of life and their differing yet ancient professions, but that coupled with the exclusive belief in a theology 'not of this world at all' that the Christian is not merely Atheistic towards all respect for sacred things, including that of the hebrew roots of their own religion, but that the Christian - caring for noting at all - becomes then a Nihilist; 'believing', in the most literal sense, in 'nothing' (except his or her own childlike desire to be immortal for all time, after their own death).

[Anonymous No.20508624]

>>20504599
he copied his overman from stirners voluntary egoist
if you need written in stone morals to not be a dickwad then you deserve the backlash without police protection that common sense is going to dishout to you
do you think that tribes just stood by and let some random guy rape their kids or plow their women back when they didn't have laws?
laws and morals sprouted from the common sense understanding that people don't like to be fucked with and to have a commonly accepted recourse on what to do when people act like idiots
voluntary egoism comes with the burden of responsibility for your own actions it just means the state won't be the one deciding that you can't beat your childs murder to death with a blunt object and instead he gets a slap on the wrist sentence of 4 years as first timer

[Anonymous No.20508628]

people who don't understand anarchy or the shunning of morality as a spook are unironic retards who have never been to places where the people manage their own "laws"

[Anonymous No.20508636]

watch this video, it will explain to you from a real life example on what the fuck max stirner was on about when he said fuck morality and all the rest of the spooks, laws and morality are just a method of control and the police protect the criminals from justified backlash instead of the victims, they only do a gesture clean up after
https://youtu.be/1Pwl4pvr300
and here is an example of your system protecting the piece of shit that deserved to be put to death if "justice" were really served
https://youtu.be/5VxV2louFq8

tldr; your morality and laws are a fucking joke to anyone who knows better

[Anonymous No.20508638]

>>20504599
>dude, Christian morals are a spook! xD The will to power is all that counts!
>w-what? You want to rob and murder me? W-why?! Don't you have morals?! AAAAAH police heeeeelp!

This is actually how an amoral person does and should act, take what he wants, act a victim and play peoples consciousness when they dont

[Anonymous No.20508642]

>>20508638
sounds a bit too jewish for me, i prefer to not have written in stone laws to tell me what to do i can be a "good" person without needing some asshole to tell me how

[Anonymous No.20508653]

>>20504895
>You criticized Christians for taking too many metaphorical interpretations, yet when I take a literal interpretation it’s still a bad thing? Make up your mind.
Tell it to the demons in hell.

[Anonymous No.20508656]

>>20508642
>sounds a bit too jewish for me
It is. Jews have no morality.

[Anonymous No.20508658]

>>20508656
they have morality, just not towards the goyim

[Anonymous No.20508662]

>>20508658
>they have morality, just not towards the goyim
Thus they dont have morality.

[Anonymous No.20508665]

>>20508662
you need to understand the difference of doing away with morality all together and only reserving it for your own in group, jews did not get rid of morality thus they know what they're doing is "wrong" and do it anyway, this makes them worse than voluntary egoists by a mile, it warps their whole being because instead of resolving the issue of morality as a spook they retain morality and "sin" against it willfully, the more they treat goyim like trash the more they twist themselves by believing that "i should be a good person to the people my morality allows it to, however i can be as evil as i want to these other people", it's how racism throughout history allowed people to behave in fucked up ways without backlash which turned them into very strange people indeed, we inherently know what we should and shouldn't do, if we hold onto laws and morality and willfully break them at the same time we become twisted, the first thing you have to do is do away with the concept of morality all together before you can break conventional morals without negative effects

[Anonymous No.20508670]

>>20508662
I thought you /pol/tards were all in favor of "my nation first"

[Anonymous No.20508683]

>>20508670
>my nation first
naturally, that is the expected path for every nation and their people, japan does it, s.korea does it and so does israel
the issue arises when israel say one thing "mass immigration and globo homo" but does another thing "israel for jews"
ironically the /pol/fags would be much better off discarding morality all together and just banding together with people who share their ideals of what world should be like than to try to revive a dead ideology that was once before in the past deemed unpalpatable for the majority
if they would be able to assimilate into anarchist movements they could try to accomplish their end goal of nationalism from within because naturally people favor the region they live in even if there would no longer be borders of nations there would still be regions

[Anonymous No.20508921]

>>20508670
>>20508683
>"mass immigration and globo homo" but does another thing "israel for jews"
this is a Christian Westerner who says this though; probably largely because a lot of the nonsense basis for the Western Europeans nihilism-amorality rests upon the fetish of having Jews around to point at and proclaim their own piety, or something. It doesn't really make any sense even in that respect but it is factually speaking Christians who forced Israel as a perpetual war crusader-state to come into being -or who enabled it to remain in stasis as a perpetual point of conflict anyway.

Even here it serves as a tacit living-breathing example for you to cite to say "well, they can have an apartheid state, why can't I".

> because naturally people favor the region they live in
idk man, if this was true than 'israel' would exist in Armenia and Georgia, where the 'tell aviv' language root came from, or in Germany where they moved to when the Ottomans kicked them out of Constantinople and they adopted all of those German-sounding names.

>ironically the /pol/fags would be much better off discarding morality all together and just banding together with people who share their ideals of what world should be like than to try to revive a dead ideology
yeah good point, and that's why left/right us/them political dichotomies are forced into existence to divide broader common ground.

>>20508665
>you need to understand the difference of doing away with morality all together and only reserving it for your own in group, jews did not get rid of morality thus they know what they're doing is "wrong" and do it anyway, this makes them worse than voluntary egoists by a mile,
>"i should be a good person to the people my morality allows it to, however i can be as evil as i want to these other people", it's how racism throughout history allowed people to behave in fucked up ways without backlash which turned them into very strange people indeed,
meh this is puritan take where "the only thing stopping everyone being jesus-like are those confounded jews", it's a deflection - unintentionally perhaps, but obviously a deflection.

If our own society has produced a political state of affairs where this is possible then it's our fault and the act of looking around elsewhere for blame is a comfort zone thing; to avoid actually challenging any of the causes of these things in your own actions (or societys cultural inclinations / flaws, etc.),

e.g. germans blaming jews didn't stop germans being drug addicts and pedophiles, so the cause went unexamined and the effect went unimpeded. result; lost the war.

[Anonymous No.20509037]

Nice wojak OP, I will now share mine

[Anonymous No.20509048]

>>20507410
>holy cope lmao
As if your inability to formulate a real response wasn't obvious enough, you now are ironically enough coping by resorting to epic meme words like cope.

[Anonymous No.20509064]

>>20509037
america was a mistake

[Anonymous No.20509097]

Why do shitty bait threads like this get so many replies? Nietzsche only prescribed going beyond good and evil to his "hyperboreans," not to society at large. His view on how society should be structured resembled the Roman Empire. Read Hugo Drochon's Nietzsche's Great Politics if Nietzsche himself is too dense for you.

[Anonymous No.20509206]

>>20504811
>>20509037
xd xd

[John Dav No.20509216]

Would Nietzsche be a wojak or a frog poster boys?

[Anonymous No.20509229]

>>20504901
>Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
>And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
you must have missed the next two verses

[Anonymous No.20509272]

>>20509229
So you're claiming that Jesus lied when he said to keep to those commandments?
You must have missed the part where what I cited was a clear and concise answer to a question, while what you quote, funnily enough given all the autistic ramblings about metaphorical interpretation, is a metaphor being used to demonstrate a point.
The rich man is far more likely to NOT keep the commandments, money and power are corruptive influences and generally those with them are surrounded by far more temptations to sin and have easier access to vices.

[Anonymous No.20509305]

>>20509272
>The rich man is far more likely to NOT keep the commandments,
it's a non-starter,this point:

the poor man or woman is equally liable to do anything to advance themselves by theft and robbery - so 'wealth' is not the cause of vice, per se, and this also glosses over all the points of good stewardship and good organization being part and parcel of actual virtue in conduct and affairs, with the contrary being simple-minded vicefulness which is self-defeating in the long term.

>money and power are corruptive influences and generally those with them are surrounded by far more temptations to sin
surrounded rather by sycophants who they don't appear to be intelligent enough to perceive; again see the above reasoning as to why.

[Anonymous No.20509493]

>>20509272
>Jesus lied when he said to keep to those commandments?
that was merely advice to an individual young man why do you think it applies to you

[Anonymous No.20509501]

I joined /lit/ in 2012 or so. I remember back when you could actually discuss Nietzsche with a few individuals who had read him and had interesting insight.

/lit/ is so dogshit today in comparison. Christlarpers are bad enough, but even outside of that it's clear most of the people in this thread haven't read Nietzsche at all.

[Anonymous No.20509855]

>>20509501
>it's clear most of the people in this thread haven't read Nietzsche at all.
i haven't.

You don't need chemotherapy (Nietzche) if you don't have cancer (Christianity), is how I think about it.