/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21204305]

>Religion bad
>Jews good
Why is every single atheist writer like this?

[Anonymous No.21204329]

The Dreyfus case really shows how repulsive antisemites are.

[Anonymous No.21204334]

>>21204305
They aren't? Hitchens was basically an anti-semite who used the classic "hurr durr my great great grandfather was a rabbi" defense. Dawkins and Dennett barely comments on the Jews so far as I know and Harris only likes them in comparison to Islam. Nietzche liked them though. Not sure what you're on about.

[Anonymous No.21204343]

>>21204334
>Hitchins
>anti-semite
Nigga was constantly shilling for Israel.

[Anonymous No.21204367]

>>21204343
Not really. Yeah I'm sure he preferred them over the towelheads ultimately but he said explicitly he thought Israel was a mistake.
"I am an Anti-Zionist. I'm one of those people of Jewish descent who believes that Zionism would be a mistake even if there were no Palestinians."

[Anonymous No.21204374]

>Religion good
>Jews bad
Why is every single chud like this?

[Anonymous No.21204614]

>>21204305
All he did was defend a wrongly accused Jew.

[Anonymous No.21204633]

>pointless low-effort retarded dogshit
Why is every single thread on /lit/ like this?

[Anonymous No.21205604]

>>21204329
>W-well this one time they were mean to a jew!
Lol fuck off

[Anonymous No.21205622]

>>21205604
They were even hardly mean. He was just an overly-sensitive, neurotic jew who overreacted to a nonissue.

[Anonymous No.21205658]

>>21204367
Fuck off. The man sucked Jewish cock non-stop
> On hearing the tidings [of his Jewish roots], I was pleased to find I was
pleased
> I was glad to learn that, while they[his Jewish mother and grandparents] sought to assimilate, they did not renounce [their Jewish identity]
> anti-Semitism is the common enemy of humanity, and one had always regarded it as such, as much by instinct as by education.

[Anonymous No.21206185]

>>21205658
I see you've decided to shift the goalposts. That means this conversation is over. Enjoy your echo chamber of doublethink, /pol/tard.

[Anonymous No.21206200]

>>21204614
>wrongly accused

[Anonymous No.21206408]

Here's my guess:
>Athiests are materialists or nihilists
>the moral system that arises from that is hedonism, and might is right
>Jewish morality comes down to what is good for jews. Killing a gentile is good if it helps a jew. (Source: You Gentiles by Maurice Samuel)

So it seems to me that if you are a materialist, christianity just gets in the way of your pleasure. And you only have a limited time to live so you should just disregard "superstitions" that impede your fun. Also, jews attack christianity too, so atheists and jews can team up on that front.

For the record, I am not an atheist anymore. The best way to convert an atheist is to prove that materialism is false.

[Anonymous No.21206413]

>>21206408
>prove that materialism is false.

I’ll bite. Prove it.

[Anonymous No.21206428]

OP must be the bastard child of one of the direct descendants of the guys that got Dreyfus into shit and now he's spamming this on /lit/ because he is looking for recognition from his "family".
Captcha: STO2Y but it's true, you know it!

[Anonymous No.21206431]

>>21204334
>Hitchens was basically an anti-semite
Lol what? I thought he identified as a secular Jew.

[Anonymous No.21206450]

>>21204367
"Zionist" is just a proxy word kikes throw around to misdirect those who begin to discern patterns. Same as moslems and jihadis. Or christians and fundamentalists. Or blacks and niggers.

[Anonymous No.21206452]

>>21204305
>Zola was the perfect representative of the buffoonery of those times. Everyone is in agreement in recognizing that this cumbersome personage was a small spirit. He loved to hear himself called poet, psychologist and savant without possessing any of the qualities that could in any way justify any of these titles. He presented himself as the chief of a realist school but in fact he never had any idea of what constituted reality. All he ever saw of things was their gross contours, and this is why his admirers say that he was especially successful in the description of crowds: his so-called violence was entirely verbal. He excelled in the art of attracting public attention by means of a vulgar sales pitch. We can compare him to a clown parading around the fairgrounds.
>Zola accused the court martial of having acquitted Esterhazy under orders, but that accusation was nothing but an “excessive metaphor.” The government pursued Zola for this metaphor before the Court of Assizes. The novelist had wanted this trial, but his disappointment was great when he saw that tribunals are organized to judge criminals and not to hear historical or literary dissertations.
>At the fifth session Zola felt the need to make a jury- which he held in contempt because it was made up of people who were too insignificant – understand what a distance there was between him and his adversaries. “There are different ways,” he shouted, “to serve France...Through my works the French language has been carried around the world. I have my victories. I leave to posterity the names of General Pellieux and Emile Zola: it will choose.” It is much to be feared for Zola’s memory that their two glories will not be found to be equivalent.
>On the advice of Clemenceau and Labori Zola took refuge a little later in England in order to let the storm pass and to await a more favorable time, during which the debates could be taken up again under better conditions. He was much reproached for this flight, and in order to justify it he used the most singular arguments: “Much later Zola told me,” said Joseph Reinach, “that he thought he heard Dreyfus on his rock asking of him this supreme sacrifice. He resigned himself to this for it seemed to him that there where he suffered most was where his duty lay.” All this because he was bored to death during his exile; the man could do nothing simply.
Zola wanted drama, he didn't care about this kike.

[Anonymous No.21206470]

>>21206452
Why are the fr*nch like this?

[Anonymous No.21206476]

>>21206413
This is what convinced me. So, if every square in the material world was destroyed, the idea of a square would still exist. More squares could be created. Also, anytime you see a square, it is a square because it is intelligibly a square. Otherwise it would just be a bunch of particles floating in space. When I said the square is a square because it is intelligibly a square, this is true whether or not it has been observed by a living being that already knows what a square is.

To exist is to be intelligible. Because everything that exists can be thought, and thinking of nothing is impossible. When you try to think of nothing, there is always something, even if it is subtle, that your mind turns to.

Matter, on its own, is a lack of intelligibility. Matter is unstable (in flux, can be destroyed or changed) but matter participates in form and becomes an unstable version of the eternal form.

So back to the square example. The idea (platonic form) of square can not be destroyed. Matter copies the form of squareness to the best of its ability and becomes intelligibly square. Because the form is indestructible and "prior to" the material square, material things and matter itself can not be the first principle.

The square was an easier to use example but this also goes for every form. And if you didnt know, forms are just ideas which exist independatly from our individual souls (psyches if you want the greek term) but we have access to the forms which helps us make sense of the sensible world that we live in.

Also, god would be the thing which is "prior to" intelligibility. God is the source of intellect and ideas and existence, and is therefore outside of it, yet is present in everything. Another way to say that is god, on his/its own is impossible to really nail down rationally, but everything that exists depends on god to exist and therefore god's influence exists in everything. Every molecule, every cell, every tree, every forest. God is beyond our comprehension, but must exist in some way different than we can understand in order for us to exist. This would be the sun from Plato's cave allegory. The form of the Good.

[Anonymous No.21206498]

>>21204305
I think people around here lack perspective. The overwhelming majority of the west does not reject the basic tenets of shitlibbism, and if you do consider those tenets to be true (especially in the golden age of naive shitlibbery, the pre-WW1 era) and corresponding to reality, and therefore find the values of shitlibbism to be true and exemplary then you really have no reason to dislike the jews and the things they do. Philosemitism and anti-semitism isn't really about the jews themselves but rather the opinion you have of the things they stand for, either positive or negative.

[Anonymous No.21206547]

>>21206476
If two men look at a shape, one claims that it is a square and another claims to see a dodecahedron, how do we determine which one is right? For a materialist the task is simple, the shape is then measured against various other shapes to determine congruency and similitude, tested to confrorm to particular physical laws, photographed, touched, scanned, and subjected to all the other means by which a material structure can be manipulated, till the degree of evidence proves one theory right. But is a platonist to do? All he can do is jerk off to invisible magical forms.

[Anonymous No.21206587]

>>21204305
Literally never happened

[Anonymous No.21206591]

>>21204343
>>21206431
Friendly reminder that israel is antisemitic
>>21206408
Meds
Death to israel
t.atheist

[Anonymous No.21206764]

>>21204305
>Religion (Christianity) Bad! Materialist Humanism Good!
>[Asian Religion] Good! Not same as Religion!
>refuses to elaborate of Jews, rarely on Islam
>always Jewish
I wonder why? Seriously, the only reason I only treat Buddhism as just a religious interpretation of oractical metaphysics is because I realised every western Buddhist was a Jew.

[Anonymous No.21206778]

>>21206764
Western buddhism/hinduism is just atheism with oriental aesthetics (and weed)

[Anonymous No.21206809]

Is this thread just /pol/?

[Anonymous No.21206826]

>>21206809
Yes, it's not so cleverly disguised

[Anonymous No.21206916]

>>21204305
>Religion bad
>Jews bad (and not just because of religion)
What are some authors like this?

[Anonymous No.21207056]

>>21206778
Exactly. God, whenever they bring up psychedelics then pretend some native american plant is different to that I roll my eyes.

[Anonymous No.21207058]

>>21206916
None really. Closest you get is spiritual but not religious.

[Anonymous No.21207061]

>>21206809
Many such cases

[Anonymous No.21207670]

>>21206764
>>always Jewish
Zola wasn't Jewish.

[Anonymous No.21207889]

>>21204633
peepeepoopoo BLRERRRRGH

[Anonymous No.21207899]

LOL

[Anonymous No.21208105]

>>21204329
Jean-Paul Sartre's existence showed how repulsive kikes are.

[Anonymous No.21208161]

>>21208105
Sartre wasn't Jewish.

[Anonymous No.21208198]

>>21204329
Julia Scarlett Elizabeth Louis-Dreyfus from Seinfeld is related to him btw.
> She is also a great-great-granddaughter of Léopold Louis-Dreyfus, who in 1851 founded the Louis Dreyfus Group, a French commodities and shipping conglomerate, which members of her family still control;[9] and is distantly related to Alfred Dreyfus of the infamous Dreyfus affair.[10][11][12]

[Anonymous No.21208868]

>>21206470
freemasonry

[Anonymous No.21208872]

>>21206200
Yea.