/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.23261630]

I'm a chud
What books should I read?

[Anonymous No.23261635]

>>23261630
Start with Rowling

[Anonymous No.23261639]

>>23261630
Culture of Critique

[Anonymous No.23261653]

you are a chud, but what do you want?

[Anonymous No.23261686]

Chud has evolved from being an insult to describing yourself

[Anonymous No.23261741]

>>23261686
Ever since the fat retard thoughtslime started using the word (title of a c-tier 1984 horror movie) in a derogatory way to describe right-wingers and right-adjacent people, 4chan saw this as retarded and hilarious and started ironically to call each other chuds.
After bunker trannies spent 10000 hours in ms paint to come up with the low-quality wojakified Patrick Crusius the deal was sealed. Almost immediately after memes were made with the chudface as the protagonist crushing trannies' skulls, gouging their eyes out and inflicting mental torture on them. The right has successfully transformed it into something of their own.
It was once again proven that the left can't meme.

[Anonymous No.23261757]

>>23261686
I use the word chud on myself and others all the time, doesn't matter the politics they argue. chud just got used so often that the word now generally means nothing, just like saying nigger or nazi. It's funny.

[Anonymous No.23261763]

>>23261741
Chuddy will ALWAYS be a gem.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=h6RwQV_j7Qk

[Anonymous No.23261792]

>>23261686
It is the current zeitgeist of our time
>um, that's not what that word means anon
Didn't ask

[Anonymous No.23261828]

The Lord of the Rings is essential. Also Redwall. Both have races of subhumans with immutably evil characteristics.

[Anonymous No.23261843]

>>23261828
>kids books
>>23261630
No one's mentioned Lovecraft or Dickens yet?
No Nietzche?
Mein Kampfe is an easy one.
>>23261639
Read the whole trilogy.
"Those who shall dwell alone" and
"Isolation and its discontents"
CoC is the third.

[Anonymous No.23261851]

>>23261630
Epic of Gilgamesh.
The Greeks. Start with Theogonies.
The Bible. translated by Robert Alter
The Talmud.
The Quran.
Any translation reccs on the latter two?

[Anonymous No.23261855]

The Little Red Book.

[Anonymous No.23261876]

>>23261851
Why the Talmud and Quran? To understand its followers?

[Anonymous No.23261878]

>>23261855
I match you, and raise you The Black Book.

[Anonymous No.23261935]

Of Cosmogonic Eros
Theory of Mind as Pure Act
Being and Time

[Anonymous No.23261944]

>>23261741
Come now Anon. If it were that simple pic related wouldn't have netted me guaranteed (you)s for almost half a decade now — it obviously triggers /pol/tards.

[CHUD SUPREMACIST No.23261948]

>>23261686
Women have reclaimed "bitch"
Black people have reclaimed "nigga"
And we have reclaimed "chud"

>>23261944
>y-you don't understand, it was created to make fun of you!
>"So was Yankee Doodle."

[Anonymous No.23261952]

Plato (Apology, Crito, Meno, Republic, Phaedo, Phaedrus, Symposium)
Aristotle (at least the ethics)
Plotinus (Enneads)
Proclus (Elements)
St. Augustine (On the Free Choice of the Will, Soliloquies, Confessions, On the Teacher, or just do all the excerpts in "Augustine in His Own Words," by Fr. Harmless)
Boethius (The Consolation of Philosophy)
St. Maximus (von Balthasar's book on him and The Cosmic Mystery)
St. Bonaventure (The Mind's Journey Into God).
St. Aquinas (Disputed Questions on Truth, On the Human Good, commentary on Boethius' De Trinitate)

Secondary:
Philosophical Mysticism in Plato, Hegel, and Today (Wallace), Plato's Critique of Impure Reason (Schindler), and maybe the Catholicity of Reason (Schindler) or Mystics (Harmless covering Evargrius, Origen, Bernard of Clairvaux, Bonaventure, Eckhart, Rumi, Dogen, etc.)

After that, congratulate yourself. You are no longer a Chud but desire the Good because it is Good, loving everyone and having moved beyond being ruled over by instinct, desire, passions, and circumstances, only choosing what you know to be Good. Don't forget to spend time in contemplation.

[Anonymous No.23262038]

>>23261944
Wow, it's literally me :)

[Anonymous No.23262051]

Mishima if you're a chud who likes Japan

[Anonymous No.23262116]

>>23261944
I tend to agree with Jean Raspail in that one of the main differences between the left wing and right wingers is in the ability to laugh at oneself. Leftists are always too self-serious. That's why they can't meme. Their only form of humor is in ridiculing people they dislike. The chudjak meme is perhaps the best example of this. The leftist mind is simply unable to comprehend that a person or a group can laugh at themselves.

[Anonymous No.23262160]

>>23261630
Chuds should start with the Greeks.
Plato and Aristotle.

[Anonymous No.23262197]

>>23262116
This is true, if you ridicule a tranny, even as a joke, you're automatically a right winger.
Meanwhile even poltroons shitpost and make meanspirited jokes at the expense of white Americans, Canadians, Anglos, etc all the time.

[Anonymous No.23262218]

>>23262160
But then they'd stop being Chuds...

No, stick to the Chud canon. Jump right to Nietzsche, then Evola, then Peterson.

[Anonymous No.23262224]

>>23262116
The most brutal images making fun of MTFs come from transgender people themselves thoughbeitsover

[Anonymous No.23262225]

>>23262218
No they wouldn't. Plato is scathingly anti-democratic, homophobic, and generally known as a proto-fascist. Read Popper for a good explanation of this belief.
Aristotle challenges some of the beliefs that are fairly common today and sets the stage of Hobbes and later Rousseau. Nietzche and Peterson are liberal thinkers.

[Anonymous No.23262229]

>>23262225
>>23262218
Although reading Nietzche is good for a philosophical understanding of some of what is wrong today. Chuds need to read more Bobbio, Eco, etc. and get a good look at how ridiculous their opposition is.

[Anonymous No.23262247]

>>23262224
Chuds draw them tracing mtf's but trannies would never use them to depict themselves. They'd rather use those anime girl pfps.

[Anonymous No.23262279]

>>23262225
Popper is widely regarded as a terrible commentator on Hegel and Plato, and for good reason.

Plato is neither a "Chud" or a liberal. His ideas transcend the retarded identity politics of our era. You might as well claim he is a liberal because of the nod to gender equality in The Republic or the idea of communally raised children, but what Plato is doing here is using the state as an analogy for justice, and picking and choosing what fits the mold of modern right/left is a terrible way to actually understand him.

Plato is first and foremost, like Hegel, a philosopher of freedom. But he is primarily concerned with an internal freedom, freedom from being ruled over by appetites and emotion, and moral freedom to transcend current opinions and desires for "what is truly good."

[Anonymous No.23262317]

>>23262225
Plato is anti-democratic because he thinks people with expertise should manage different states of affairs. The shoe maker knows how to make shows, the doctor knows how to heal. Why then should the leader of public policy be whoever can win a popularity contest?

But it's hard to see how this fits with either the modern left or right. All the complaints against the "deep state," are complaints against the idea of career public policy specialists running the show instead of elected officials and their ideologically appointed staff.

Likewise, anti-scientific views, which have a home on the right and left, cut against Plato's point.

The lauding of commercial success and the fixation on growth as a measurement of success would be the other big place of divergence. Aristotle lists pleonexia, the grasping desire for ever more wealth and volume, as a major vice. Contrast this with why people like Elon Musk are lauded for making so much money.

The ancient and medieval view is too different to be placed into today's categories.

[Anonymous No.23262324]

>>23262225
This dude seriously suggested Popper. As bad as Adorno with labeling everthing erroneously.

[Anonymous No.23262330]

>>23262279
Ah, so you're stupid, ignorant, and a sophist.
A good way to tell if a person's "ideas transcend the retarded identity politics of our era," is to imagine them in a college campus giving an exact exposition of their beliefs. If Plato were to espouse his normal views of gender equality, both the left and right would go
>Okay? So?
If he were then to say
>The last extreme of popular liberty is when the slave bought with money, whether male or female, is just as free as his or her purchaser; nor must I forget to tell of the liberty and equality of the two sexes in relation to each other.
The left would reply WAIT WHAT THE FUCK
And if he were to go on,
>That is what I am doing, I replied; and I must add that no one who does not know would believe, how much greater is the liberty which the animals who are under the dominion of man have in a democracy than in any other State: for truly, the she-dogs, as the proverb says, are as good as their she-mistresses, and the horses and asses have a way of marching along with all the rights and dignities of freemen; and they will run at any body who comes in their way if he does not leave the road clear for them: and all things are just ready to burst with liberty.
Not to mention the before:
>When a democracy which is thirsting for freedom has evil cup-bearers presiding over the feast, and has drunk too deeply of the strong wine of freedom, then, unless her rulers are very amenable and give a plentiful draught, she calls them to account and punishes them, and says that they are cursed oligarchs.
A prescient critique of socialism and communism arising from liberalism.
And what of his racialist views in Menexenus?
>considering that life is not life to one who is a dishonour to his race, and that to such a one neither men nor Gods are friendly, either while he is on the earth or after death in the world below.
Which commentators must grasp for straws again to argue out of Plato's absolutely racialistic thinking? Then we can quote his incontrovertible condemnation of all sexual promiscuity and homosexuality.

We can go on— No matter the very slim "leftist" things you can pick from Plato, all of his views, on the whole, if practiced by any politician today, would result in a resounding and extreme condemnation of ultra far-right extremism. A chud has a lot in common with Plato's views, far more than a modern progressive, and to say "well republicans didn't exist back then so he definitionally cannot be aligned with what we term 'the right'" is sophistry. It doesn't matter, because a Chud will find himself agreeing with almost every word spoken by Plato.

[Anonymous No.23262338]

>>23262317
You didn't read Plato. You're actually retarded, and it's evident because you don't even understand Plato's critique of democracy. Not even universities claim that that is the basis of Plato's anti-democratic critiques.
>>23262324
The only thing I'm suggesting is Popper's critique of Plato. I disagree with Popper and the open society completely— but to say that "an author disagrees with me therefore I will reject everything he said" is fucking retarded. Popper correctly identifies Plato as aligning with what he terms "the closed society" or what a Chud and Plato would consider "the Ideal society."

[Anonymous No.23262341]

>>23262317
Capitalism is leftist. No chud can look at the debasement of his culture and race by international capital and say
>This is... le good!!1

[Anonymous No.23262345]

>>23262279
>Popper is widely regarded as a terrible commentator on Hegel and Plato, and for good reason.
By whom? Argument from authority.
> Plato is neither a "Chud" or a liberal
He was one of the first chuds to roam the earth. Direct quote from him:
> The greatest principle of all’, he writes, ‘is that nobody, whether male or female, should ever be without a leader. Nor should the mind of anybody be habituated to letting him do anything at all on his own initiative, neither out of zeal, nor even playfully. But in war and in the midst of peace—to his leader he shall direct his eye, and follow him faithfully. And even in the smallest matters he should stand under leadership. For example, he should get up, or move, or wash, or take his meals34 … only if he has been told to do so … In a word, he should teach his soul, by long habit, never to dream of acting independently, and to become utterly incapable of it. In this way the life of all will be spent in total community.
> His ideas transcend the retarded identity politics of our era
His ideas are very much in line with most authoritarian ideologies of today. Example: russian historicism and adoration of a strong leader. Constant right winger appeal to tradition and the past.
> You might as well claim he is a liberal because of the nod to gender equality in The Republic or the idea of communally raised children,
Forcing to raise children communally is not liberal.
> but what Plato is doing here is using the state as an analogy for justice
Not an analogy. He DEFINES justice as that which is good for the state. This is clear from many passages in the Republic.
> Plato is first and foremost, like Hegel, a philosopher of freedom
kek maybe if your idea of freedom is not having any personal autonomy, being chained to a pole like cattle, then yes. Otherwise no.
> But he is primarily concerned with an internal freedom, freedom from being ruled over by appetites and emotion, and moral freedom to transcend current opinions and desires for "what is truly good."
And what is truly good turns out, surprise surprise, that which is good for the state. The individual becomes irrelevant. Freedom = freedom of the state to do whatever it wants for the individual. Tasty meat.

[Anonymous No.23262350]

>>23262279
>>23262317
Treating women with dignity and respect is also not leftist. Rightists adore right-wing uberwomen to an almost cringe degree.

[Anonymous No.23262352]

n.b a "chud" is someone singled out by the drooling herd animalized leftoid cattle for not being up to date with the latest moral program published by the cathedral, even your grandpa was almost certainly a "chud"

[Anonymous No.23262357]

>>23262279
>its just an analogy bro
this nigga really never read Laws philosophy 101 retard

[Anonymous No.23262360]

>>23262317
>Plato is anti-democratic because he thinks people with expertise should manage different states of affairs
He's also anti-democratic because he says repeatedly how much he hates democracy lol.
Literally everyone agrees that it's better for a more qualified person to manage different states of affairs than for an inexperienced person, all else being equal. This is a false argument. As Popper says, the question is not "who should rule" but rather in what way we should set up a our system of government that is stable and promotes freedom and openness (i.e. isn't authoritarian). Democracy and the open society is a natural answer to that question.

[Anonymous No.23262369]

>>23262360
>>23262357
>>23262350
>>23262345
>>23262341
>>23262338
>>23262330
>this much seethe
Okay, Plato was a chud. So what? You still can't breed.

[Anonymous No.23262627]

>>23262338
The argument from expertise is right in The Republic. Plato does not think "democracy is bad because I Plato say so," is a good argument. What is important is why it is bad. Why is that exactly?

Is being for democracy or against it the defining feature of left vs right? That would be strange since it would make the Soviet Union, Lenin, and the CCP key right-wing entities, whereas Reagan and Thatcher would be to the left of them.

[Anonymous No.23262647]

>>23261630
Pic related

[Anonymous No.23262650]

>>23262627
Holy shit you're retarded. That isn't anon's point.

[Anonymous No.23262699]

>>23261944
you're next

[Anonymous No.23262711]

>>23261630
nick land

[Anonymous No.23262716]

Read Mein Kampf. It's not a controversial book, it contains far less anti-jew sentiment than modern jew books do on White People.

[Anonymous No.23262758]

>>23262716
Mein Kampf is philosophically empty and only useful to chuds to better understand history and erode faith in education and media representation of history, historical figures, etc. But by no meand essential to a chud.

[Anonymous No.23262770]

>>23262758
You are wrong in assuming people read philosophical books and from it have such a profound impact from it that they change their life because of it. This does not happen for the average man or even the above average man.

Reading books like Mein Kampf and other non-philosophical works imparts a simple understanding on what things could be like. They will then carry in their mind these new thoughts, gradually changing what they value, but not massively impacting their life until such a time that sufficient people all want the same thing and from which a Great Man emerges.

Read Mein Kampf.

[Anonymous No.23262772]

>>23262758
I used to be kind of a neo-nazi but reading Mein Kampf unironically made me hate hitler and nazis and embrace the open society.

[Anonymous No.23262784]

>>23262770
Funnily enough many of the lies propagated by alt-righters on twitter and on /pol/ are dispelled by simply reading mein kampf. As such, I recommend it to every potential right winger, to teach them the truth about hitler.
He was not a hero. He was a cultural and intellectual nigger who deserved to lose and die.

[Anonymous No.23262800]

>>23261686
We missed the point by idolizing him (starter pack)

[Anonymous No.23262805]

>>23262224
>thoughbeitsover
go back to sharty

[Anonymous No.23262809]

>>23262369
And you can't sneed

[Anonymous No.23262825]

>>23262650
???

I said part of Plato's argument against democracy is that it puts leaders in charge who have no expertise in leading or in governance.

You said this is "retarded," and that "not even universities," pretend this is his argument, and that I "clearly have not read Plato." I find this a bit amusing considering the exact example I used "who would you go to to fix your shoes? A shoe maker. Who should run a polis? Whoever is most popular," is pulled directly from Plato:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://philarchive.org/archive/REIPOD-2&ved=2ahUKEwiYvcLGyrCFAxWQkO4BHeFKBSwQFnoECCEQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0NxehsktKpH1bPHEC70MZI

Further, you might consider how Plato sets up his ideal state. What makes the philosopher king the ideal ruler? What is the purpose of their rigorous half century of education?

But this is, of course, deeply at odds with the populism embraced by the "Chudspace," that you get from Tucker, Hannity, Yarvin, Land, etc. Complaints against the deep state, railing about technocrats, etc. is sort of the opposite of what Plato has in mind.

How Plato defines "temperance" in the state is instructive here. It is every member of society being ruled over by the rational part of the soul, striving for the good of the whole (not the individual), and sticking to their role (sort of the opposite of decrying technocrats for not being responsive to "the people").

Another area where Plato diverges from these disparate voices (Tucker, BAP, Land) etc. is on the role and sovereignty of the individual. Plato, like most Greeks of his era, puts the Polis first. MacIntyre's After Virtue is a pretty good case study in how the Greeks viewed the individual's relationship to their polis. They only were who they were in virtue of the polis, and this gives it primacy. We can see this in Socrates' explanation of why he must accept his punishment in Plato's Crito. But you get a quite opposed view watching Hannity or Tucker, or diving into Land (granted, these are also pretty diverse viewpoints).

Popper's analysis of Plato and Hegel is widely derided in that it is an inaccurate account of their viewpoints. But it's worth pointing out here that Yarvin puts forth Popper's open society as the goal that the liberal/left Cathedral is stifling. Nick Land hardly endorsed his work, and yet this is the modern right diametrically opposed to at least part of Plato's project.

Plato is neither left or right in the modern sense. Critics of Plato in the 20th century generally tried to paint him as endorsing the totalitarian states of that era. E.g., Plato's Republic was A Brave New World, or the Soviet Union, etc. But while Plato is an authoritarian, he is not in favor of just any authoritarian rule, only that which is just.

Hegel's Philosophy of Right is probably the best follow on to the Republic, and Hegel likewise is neither left nor right. He is more the ground from which the modern left and right spring.

[Anonymous No.23262840]

>>23262825
This is why Honneth of the Frankfurt School and Fukuyama, a neocon, can both embrace Hegel's vision. And indeed, there is plenty Honneth and Fukuyama can agree upon.

The folks who have no common ground are the propagandists, left and right. But the propagandists from both sides cannot claim Plato because they tend towards populism and individualist conceptions of the ideal state.

[Anonymous No.23262861]

>>23262784
Because of this middling attempt at reverse psychology, I am going to read it. It is such a wildly idiotic thing you have claimed. Is just so ridiculous in thought and for lack of a better term 'jewish' in nature that I want to read it just to refute your intentions which are to discouraging people from reading it.

Thank you.

[Anonymous No.23262867]

>>23262772
Please explain why.
This sounds like a fake opinion for You's.

[Anonymous No.23262869]

>>23261630
very anti-semitic gif

[Anonymous No.23262877]

>>23262784
You have not read Mein Kampfe, otherwise you would provide clear examples to make the chuds seethe.

[Anonymous No.23262892]

>>23262772
>>23262867
Every. Single. Time.

[Anonymous No.23262902]

>>23262867
/pol/ likes to claim:
- he wanted simply preserve his own people (actually says in the book he wants to dominate the world)
- deny lebensraum (laid out explicitly by hitler himself in the book in many places)
- he cared about sad incel losers (actually constantly talks about survival of the fittest, that the strong shall rule in the book)
- he was a genius/smart (constant anti-intellectuallism throughout the book, claiming he's street smart and hating on "book-smart" people)
- his hate for the jews wasn't irrational (the book goes from 0 to 100 on jew hatred very quickly without a clear development for reasons for that hatred. Very obvious it was just irrational emotional seething)
- didn't hate slavs/eastern europeans (many derisive remarks about them in the book)

He derided the german objectivity and talked about how germans need to be more irrational and always backing their own side like the french. I.e. he hated objectivity and truth.
Imo his constant seething about how "might makes right" sealed the deal for me. I thought it was mostly a meme about the nazis by the jews, but seeing the words from hitler himself really changed my mind. His own ideology refutes itself, since he lost the war. He was proven wrong by the fact that his enemy was mightier. And I'm glad he lost the war.

[Voluntary Fool No.23262921]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3e6a7SW8wZA

[Anonymous No.23262926]

>>23262369
But they can, see >>23261763

[Anonymous No.23262949]

>>23262902
>- he wanted simply preserve his own people(actually says in the book he wants to dominate the world)
It literally says he wants to preserve the Germanic people in the face of Eastern persecution. All over Eastern Europe Ethnic Germans were being killed, starved, beaten, raped and worse. Hence Hitler's wish to unify the German people under one banner.

>- deny lebensraum (laid out explicitly by hitler himself in the book in many places)
The land they reclaimed was largely their land that was forced to give up at the conclusion of World War 1, this land was that which was always German and was not acquired during the course of WW1.

>- he cared about sad incel losers (actually constantly talks about survival of the fittest, that the strong shall rule in the book)
Nobody makes this claim.

>- he was a genius/smart (constant anti-intellectuallism throughout the book, claiming he's street smart and hating on "book-smart" people)
He was a gifted individual who had the rare opportunity to remain amongst the working class. His movement, the NSDAP, was that of the rough, working man and not an intellectual movement. As he says in the book, he needed the man of action and not the man of theory. This is does not translate to anti-intellectualism.

>- his hate for the jews wasn't irrational (the book goes from 0 to 100 on jew hatred very quickly without a clear development for reasons for that hatred. Very obvious it was just irrational emotional seething)
Jews were over-represented in Marxist agitation, over-represented in Communist takeovers, over-represented in capitulation during the war, over-represented in malingering, over-represented in financial exploitation, over-represented in child sex circles, over-represented in whoring and prostitution, over-represented in the Weimar alt-sex scene, over-represented in every single aspect of the problems that plagued the German Republic.

>- didn't hate slavs/eastern europeans (many derisive remarks about them in the book)
The one thing you said that was true. Hitler and the Nazi's were not a fan of Slavs and most Eastern Europeans. One must take this in the correct context, that there were many ethnic Germans living amongst the Eastern European nations that they had once owned as Germanic states. These are the only ones they valued.

[Anonymous No.23262953]

>>23262825
Your average Chud is a 20-35 year old from a fairly well off family who was told to expect an easy life of success from their Boomer and Gen X dads. They were special and smart and destined for success.

Except they came of age in a time where more and more of total income went to capital, not labor, where they had to compete with a vast sea of educated foreigners, and where demand for "any guy, so long as he's decently competent," had fallen out of the job market.

So, they are very angry that they were sold on this idea of the "good life," and now find it unachievable. Also, they can't find romantic partners, and online hookup apps have only made this worse.

But they aren't generally actually against technocratic rule. Rather, they see their straits as evidence that the wrong technocrats are in charge. DEI, feminism, etc., evil scheming elites, this has all made it so that the good people aren't ruling.

Thus, there is no real conflict here. Authoritarianism would be ok if the right ruler was in charge, and rule by technocrats would be alright if they could be the technocrats.

But the people who make money riling them up have also gotten them to drink deeply from the well of identity politics and post-modernism, modern sophistry, and that's a whole different issue. "Truth isn't truth," as Guliani put it, it's all "narratives," all the way down.

[Anonymous No.23262960]

>>23262825
And this is why you were called a sophist. Your argument is vacuous and does not refute the idea that Plato is located squarely to the right by any measure of "right" or "left." In order to try to "win" a losing argument you are reducing the entirety of Plato's arguments against democracy to "it puts leaders in charge who have no expertise in leading or in governance," and then assuming that in this way you can claim Plato is not right of the modern left.
Again: Sophistry. You might as well say that he wasn't anti-homosexuality because he believed that homosexuality was bad because it led to disorder of the soul, or that he wasn't anti-hedonism because he just wanted to increase justice. I repeat: You rely on sophistry and sophistry alone. You come off as incredibly ignorant and pathetic. (Not to mention your horrific reddit formatting)

The rest of your post is not worth arguing against. You failed to make an argument for why Plato would not be considered right wing, and instead try desperately to reinforce a dead point. But to your comfort, I will ask you whether I would be considered right-wing or left-wing if I were to post this on my tinder profile:
>Homosexual intercourse should be punished with death or exile.
>Women are the weaker sex, but overall there should be equality between the sexes.
>Children should be raised communally where possible.
>Democracy is evil because it leads to people that have no expertise running things. We should be run by the best of the best, the wisest.
>Democracy is also bad because the people become greedy and try to "deprive the rich of their estates and distribute them among the people;"
>And because they "chafe impatiently at the least touch of authority, and at length, as you know, they cease to care even for the laws, written or unwritten; they will have no one over them."
The point isn't that "LE PLATO IS LITERALLY DONDALD DRUMPF!!!!" which your peanut-sized dribbling brain wants to shoehorn everything into (consequently, it is obvious that you cannot escape identity politics), it is that the chud (a rightist) is going to agree with Plato by many leagues and in many more ways than a leftist could. To that effect, any modern political moderate that takes to heart Plato's writings will end up considered by any modern thinker right of where they started. This is all that is necessary to prove the original point: Plato is a good as a chud read.

[Anonymous No.23262969]

>>23262825
>I find this a bit amusing considering the exact example I used "who would you go to to fix your shoes? A shoe maker. Who should run a polis? Whoever is most popular," is pulled directly from Plato:
quoting plato is meaningless when you clearly didn't understand the book. you mischaracterize platos philosophy. you're a literal pseud.

[Anonymous No.23262977]

>>23262953
>more reddit spacing
>more criticism of identity politics
>more contradictory use of identity politics
I keep seeing you around. You must be between the ages of 15-19 and have an IQ of roughly 75-90. You may be one of the least self-aware posters on /lit/.

[Anonymous No.23262981]

>>23262960
In the Laws Plato also sets a limit on how much wealth a given family can accumulate and how much of their property a household can alienate. I don't know how this possibly can be said to fit with the modern right.

And you didn't refute my argument, you resorted to name calling again almost immediately. Your first posts had absolutely zero argument, just "you're a retard and haven't read Plato, absolutely no one says that about him."

But of course, you've backtracked on that, since, as I pointed out, my example is directly from Plato.

So no, I don't agree with you, Plato's level of collectivism and the focus on the polis above the individual puts him deeply at odds with the modern right.

Who exactly are the modern right wing thinkers who agree with Plato here? It sure as hell isn't anyone in politics of with a big program in the mass media. It sure as hell isn't Nick Land, Yarvin, or the other post modern right wingers.

D.C. Schindler would be a good example, as would a lot of conservatives in the Catholic philosophy space, but they also tend to allow that much of their collectivist and economic leanings are on the left.

[Anonymous No.23262982]

>>23262360
>promotes freedom and openness (i.e. isn't authoritarian). Democracy and the open society is a natural answer to that question.
that's factually false those

after atheists created their democratic republic to base society on commerce, saying that merchants will never dare to wage wars, contrary to absolute monarchies, because they are too busy being greedy, they somehow managed to create WW2 and 80 years later they manage to still be obsessed with it

[Anonymous No.23262987]

you guys have to accept that
1/ all societies decay
2/ the democratic republics by the bourgeois will not be exempted from decay
3/ the new society will not have the bourgeois at the top, ie it will not be a republic
4/ if the new model of society is so obvious, the bourgeois will do anything to kill it and keep their republics alive
5/ the new society will NEVER EVER be created by any civil servants or businessman.
=>The solution will never come from any media products like Zemmour in France, nor from a business product like Trump in the USA, nor from an academic product like Milei (in democracy, academia is part of the entertainment industry), nor from a woman, because in democracy women are products of bureaucracies and marketing.
The solution will come from somebody who is not part of the republic. Only an external element and external event from the republic will destroy the republic and the bureaucrats-businessmen for good.

The point is that it will be so strange that westerners won't see it coming

[Anonymous No.23262988]

>>23262981
>>23262960
BTW, Plato's exact prescription is that the richest household can hold no more than four times as much wealth as the poorest.

Please explain how this is in line with the modern right lol. I am begining to think it is you who have not actually read Plato, just Popper's drivel.

[Anonymous No.23262991]

lol Hitler is a piece of shit socialist
>Why," I asked Hitler, "do you call yourself a National Socialist, since your party programme is the very antithesis of that commonly accredited to socialism?"

>"Socialism," he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, pugnaciously, "is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists!"

>"Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic."
-Adolf Hitler, Interview with George Sylvester Viereck, 1923

[Anonymous No.23262996]

>>23262825
>He is more the ground from which the modern left and right spring.
You got this from google. Here's a question for you: What concepts do "right" and "left" describe? We are not describing political allegiance to specific parties, but alignment along tendencies towards specific beliefs. Hegel, Plato, Aristotle, Julius Caesar, Cicero, and any random person from history is not going to seem like a leftist if transported to today. That's the point: No one saying that Plato = A Modern Republican Voter. You are an idiot if you believe that. The point is that Plato is going to align more closely with what anyone considers to be right than left, and that's enough to label them as "rightist." Unless you want to start labelling Peterson as leftist because he agrees with gender equality and opposes fascism. Retard.

[Anonymous No.23262997]

>>23262345
>kek maybe if your idea of freedom is not having any personal autonomy, being chained to a pole like cattle, then yes. Otherwise no.
It's the opposite. Freeing your mind from distractions to the right thing is freedom.

>>23262345
>And what is truly good turns out, surprise surprise, that which is good for the state. The individual becomes irrelevant. Freedom = freedom of the state to do whatever it wants for the individual. Tasty meat.
The invidual never mattered ever. That isnt to say individuals don't matter but in a larger sense. You aren't as free as you think you are. You are always a part of something so if participation is baked in why wouldn't you do good for the state? Especially if the state is an extension of one's people. You can also promote healthy liberties for people and also the state. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

[Anonymous No.23263001]

>>23262988
>Please explain how this is in line with the modern right lol. I am begining to think it is you who have not actually read Plato, just Popper's drivel.
>rightist = capitalist neocon
You are the one that chooses to brute-force everything into modern political parties. A child's intellect.

[Anonymous No.23263005]

>>23262772
>I used to be kind of a neo-nazi but
Typing racial profanities and voting trump isn't nazi. You're just border line retarded.

[Anonymous No.23263016]

>>23262949
>It literally says he wants to preserve the Germanic people in the face of Eastern persecution. All over Eastern Europe Ethnic Germans were being killed, starved, beaten, raped and worse. Hence Hitler's wish to unify the German people under one banner.
Except he want to expand even to where there were no significant presence of germans, and to populate those areas with germans.
His goal was obviously imperialism, domination of other races and expansionism, not the simple preservation of a people.
>The land they reclaimed was largely their land that was forced to give up at the conclusion of World War 1,
>largely
We both know his plans went much further than that. Also historicism doesn't help his case in my eyes.
>- he cared about sad incel losers (actually constantly talks about survival of the fittest, that the strong shall rule in the book)
>Nobody makes this claim.
Except all the people recruiting and propagandizing to all the sad loners on /pol/ like me.
Also hitler himself talks about this a bit (though indirectly). He talks about how sad he is to see broken german families, alcoholism, the lack of any ambition in his fellow germans, and wonder if it's worth fighting for such people or not at times. Clearly he's experiencing cognitive dissonance because he's holding two contradictory beliefs (survival of the fittest/let the weak die vs serve germans and germany at all cost).

>As he says in the book, he needed the man of action and not the man of theory. This is does not translate to anti-intellectualism.
He was gifted, I'll give you that much. But smart people can also be anti-intellectual. I gave examples of his anti-intellectualism already. Constantly deriding intellectuals around him as book smart, but not actually knowing anything, instead of engaging with their ideas and refuting them. His might is right philosophy is perhaps the best example of anti-intellectuallism. In his book he constantly derides objectivity as a dogma/mania/infection:
> And that, of course, was increased by the mania for objectivity which addicts our people. Everybody began to be careful about doing an injustice to the enemy, even at the cost of seriously injuring, and even ruining his own people and State.

[Anonymous No.23263019]

>>23262981
>In the Laws Plato also sets a limit on how much wealth a given family can accumulate and how much of their property a household can alienate. I don't know how this possibly can be said to fit with the modern right.
>Everything must be republican or democrat
>And you didn't refute my argument, you resorted to name calling again almost immediately. Your first posts had absolutely zero argument, just "you're a retard and haven't read Plato, absolutely no one says that about him."
Your argument was refuted, but I'm getting the feeling that you aren't even capable of understanding the source material, let alone the posts. Again, your peanut brain cannot read something like
>You might as well say that he wasn't anti-homosexuality because he believed that homosexuality was bad because it led to disorder of the soul,
And understand how it refutes the idea that whatever grounds you base Plato's beliefs on, the result is the same. But worse, I offered more quotations from Plato on democracy, showing that your argument was one of the many flaws pointed out by Plato.

Of course I'm going to resort to name calling. I'm arguing with a child that can't read and has to consult google with every post.

[Anonymous No.23263023]

>>23262981
Why does an anon need to refute your point when you haven't refuted his?

[Anonymous No.23263030]

[Anonymous No.23263033]

>>23263016
>>23262949
>Jews were over-represented in Marxist agitation, over-represented in Communist takeovers, over-represented in capitulation during the war, over-represented in malingering, over-represented in financial exploitation, over-represented in child sex circles, over-represented in whoring and prostitution, over-represented in the Weimar alt-sex scene, over-represented in every single aspect of the problems that plagued the German Republic.
AFAIK all the true points that you made are explained by their higher IQ on average and their higher personality factor. If you studied any technical subject like math, physics or computer science, you'd know that jewish smarts is not a meme. Their names pop up everywhere for genuinely groundbreaking and innovative contributions. I've studied math so I know about it.
/pol/lacks like Leather Apron Club make videos trying to refute it but end up making fallacious arguments that IQ realists on their own side reject and refute.

[Anonymous No.23263050]

>>23263005
I was a nazi in leftist eyes (still am) because I like white people and consider mass immigration by the third world to white countries to be a bad thing. I am considered a nazi by the left because I believe in the existence racial IQ differences. I am considered a nazi because I think truth should be preserved even when they contradict social mores and are racist.
I just stopped viewing hitler positively after having red mein kampf.

[Anonymous No.23263053]

>>23262988
Popper literally talks about this you dolt. Wealth inequality is bad because it creates envy and greed, thus discord among the elites, which leads to change (revolution), i.e. degeneration.

[Anonymous No.23263054]

>>23263050
Then you don't believe in the open society. Popper's open society is more or less the absolute anti-thesis of a well-ordered organic one (of which Nazi Germany was Popper's Boogeyman example of the most organic).

[Anonymous No.23263055]

>>23263053
He's a monkey at a typewriter. There isn't even a reason to respond.

[Anonymous No.23263057]

>>23263054
Literally none of the statements I made are in contradiction with the open society.

[Anonymous No.23263123]

>>23263033
Not the guy you're replying to, but I wanted to jump in because I've heard this point before and I had a question about it.

I agree that jews have a higher than average IQ and that goes pretty far in explaining their representation in intellectual fields, but I don't see how that means you should want them in your society.

Let's set aside the talk about jews being morally decadent, etc, and just think of them as a highly intelligent, distinct ethnic group that lives within a larger host society. Why would I assume that their interests are my interests? Why would I assume that their vision of an ideal society is compatible with my vision of an ideal society? It's visible even with people like Moldbug. He's high IQ and considered to be a radical right-winger, but his ideal society still has this distinctly jewish flavor to it. It's essentially a cosmopolitan aristocracy ruled by a techno-elite that is vaguely racist towards low IQ groups, it's exactly the atmosphere that a jew would feel safe within.

I think it is completely rational that jews feel most at home in diverse bazaar-esque societies that prioritize intelligence and it makes sense that they would have a distaste for an ethnically homogenous society with a folkish spirit that ties the different classes together because in a land like that they are acutely alien.

My point being that I think it is possible to look at jews rationally as highly intelligent, understand the place that they occupy in society without resorting to seeing them as a bugaboo, and at the same time, be very concerned about their presence.

[Anonymous No.23263142]

>>23263033
>AFAIK all the true points that you made are explained by their higher IQ on average and their higher personality factor. If you studied any technical subject like math, physics or computer science, you'd know that jewish smarts is not a meme. Their names pop up everywhere for genuinely groundbreaking and innovative contributions. I've studied math so I know about it.
We are all aware of the German-raised Jew being amongst the most intellectually gifted peoples in the World. Yet, why do other non-German fostered jews appear in this group? Could it be that the Germanic influence is what made them the rivals of the land of Poets and Thinkers? Only the Ashkenazi are referenced, amongst the many dozens of jewish sub-groups. Intelligence does not at all explain their over-representation in movements and groups that had the soul intention of destroying their host nation. Why they cleaved more to Judeo-Bolshivism than Germanic rootedness.

[Anonymous No.23263170]

>>23263016
>Constantly deriding intellectuals around him as book smart, but not actually knowing anything, instead of engaging with their ideas and refuting them.
You can't refute theorists as their is nothing to refute. It is opinion vs opinion. This is the pitfall the Right falls in to today. Further he explicitly criticized the intellectual for lack of action, dozens of Nationalist/Racialist/Germanic groups when the DAP was founded, none amounted to anything. It took a man of action to forge a handful of theorists, intellectuals and thinkers in to the most feared political party the world has ever known.

>His might is right philosophy is perhaps the best example of anti-intellectuallism. In his book he constantly derides objectivity as a dogma/mania/infection:
He refutes the presence of Objectivity in the Parliamentary system and in ruling. Which is correct, there is more to leadership than simply stats and figures as we are learning today. There must be a greater quasi-spiritualist aspect. Further he correctly states that crowds and mass movements are not formed on rational objectivity but are entirely emotive and irrational.

[Anonymous No.23263181]

>>23263123
>but I don't see how that means you should want them in your society.
Because having high IQ people in your society is extremely valuable? Scientific achievement, cultural achievement, technological achievement all needs high IQ people to produce.
> Why would I assume that their interests are my interests?
Why would you assume that about any other ethnic group? That's a weird question. Their individual self interest is likely to have some elements at odds with your individual self-interest (as with the case with any two individuals). If you're referring to a group interest, it's perfectly legitimate for a group to have interests as long as it respects and tolerates other groups.
> Why would I assume that their vision of an ideal society is compatible with my vision of an ideal society
Why would a vision of an ideal society matter at all? All visions of an ideal society are delusions/mirages. Reality is simply too hard to predict for that.
> It's visible even with people like Moldbug. He's high IQ and considered to be a radical right-winger, but his ideal society still has this distinctly jewish flavor to it
I am not a moldbugian. He's opposed to democracy so I'm opposed to him.
I don't exactly see the relevance of your example.
> My point being that I think it is possible to look at jews rationally as highly intelligent, understand the place that they occupy in society without resorting to seeing them as a bugaboo, and at the same time, be very concerned about their presence.
If you believe in racial supremacy (my people should rule over this land) and want to expel other ethnicities, obviously that's a rational reason to be concerned about the presence of the other groups.
If you like democracy and open society, I don't see a good reason to be concerned about jews specifically.

[Anonymous No.23263193]

>>23263142
>Could it be that the Germanic influence is what made them the rivals of the land of Poets and Thinkers? Only the Ashkenazi are referenced, amongst the many dozens of jewish sub-groups
Culture is very important, I agree. Also the ashk jews who lived in germany were probably genetically smarter too for a variety of different reasons.
> Could it be that the Germanic influence is what made them the rivals of the land of Poets and Thinkers?
It could very well be.
> Intelligence does not at all explain their over-representation in movements and groups that had the soul intention of destroying their host nation.
That's your interpretation of the events. I'm sure that's not how a lot of them saw things. I'm pretty sure that as wrong and as deluded the bolsheviks were, they were seeing themselves as the good guys, and weren't motivated by the hatred of regular russians.
> Why they cleaved more to Judeo-Bolshivism than Germanic rootedness
One hypothesis is that their culture was simply more agentic than other cultures.

[Anonymous No.23263216]

>>23261944
>you’re obviously triggered
Chuds are untriggerable

[Anonymous No.23263230]

>>23263193
>Also the ashk jews who lived in germany were probably genetically smarter too for a variety of different reasons.
Such as?

>they were seeing themselves as the good guys, and weren't motivated by the hatred of regular russians.
Ah yes, which is why the jews were massively over-represented in every aspect of Communism that was related to the brutal murder and genocide of native Europeans. Be it the Cheka, the NKVD, the KGB and more. It is entirely a coincidence that they were underrepresented in the camps as prisoners and the OKB's as scientists in Russia. Yet somehow, despite the persecution they suffered in Germany, after the war they occupied much of the same positions, they were over-represented in the Communist party Organs and intelligence agencies.

>One hypothesis is that their culture was simply more agentic than other cultures.
The jewish culture is indeed that, lacking any tie or obligation to their host often allows far more agency and ability in joining anti-national and anti-native movements. This is why they suffer persecution.

[Anonymous No.23263232]

>>23261741
Their "jokes" rarely work, because a joke needs to expose some kernel of truth in order to be funny. The left can’t meme because they live in a lie.

[Anonymous No.23263233]

>>23261686
When people stop responding to something, especially if not to tell you it doesn't bother them, it means what you're saying is ineffective. Chud either means the worst of the worst or it means anything and if you need to be told you're a woman you aren't one.

[Anonymous No.23263276]

>>23263181
>Because having high IQ people in your society is extremely valuable? Scientific achievement, cultural achievement, technological achievement all needs high IQ people to produce.
I think that the presence of jews in Arab or black societies would make sense because, despite their interests possibly being at odds with their host from time to time, their intelligence offsets the deficit in intelligence that the host society has, so they might overall do more good.

This is much less of an issue with northern Europeans though, and I wonder if this has something to do with the historical tension that they have. If I'm German or English, I don't know that I value the intelligence of jewish people that much. They'll contribute about as much as my own people would, but I get the downside of them advocating for their ethnic interests or pushing a psychology that is at odds with the way that my people think.

Germans, for example, are racially autistic. They're all painfully autistic, like little robots obsessed with order, efficiency, hierarchy, the ends justify the means, etc. That is their ethnic psychology and I would trust that German intellectuals would be more likely to come up with ideas that are compatible with that spirit. Maybe they'll push boundaries here and there, but fundamentally, they come from that spirit and are not going to wildly disrupt it. Jews are not like that though. They're egalitarian, they're moralizers, they have odd sexual complexes and neurosis, they're pretty tribal and that can at times make them hypocritical. That's just their spirit, for better or worse that's what they're coming with along with the intelligence, and whether or not you think that the juice is worth the squeeze is going to vary.

It's just important to know what you're getting. I think that looking at people as collections of individuals and blinding yourself to larger patterns of behavior that is visible within groups is just wearing blinders.

[Anonymous No.23263279]

>>23263001

Please don't tell me that this is also you Anon >>23262960 .

You are the one arguing that Plato is a "Chud," and now you are bitching about using modern labels for him, which was the original point made here >>23262279

And yet you are still apparently defending "Plato is a Chud," on the ludicrous grounds that "his Tinder profile would be like, totally Chud."

Sad. I get you identify with the label, but maybe you don't need to lump philosophers you hardly understand in with it. Plato was not a Chud because he wasn't an angry incel, the defining feature of Chudom.

[Anonymous No.23263324]

>>23262960
Where does Plato say this?

He barely mentions homosex and never mentions it simpliciter. Consensus is that we don't really know what he thought about it. But death for it? Where the fuck is that?

[Anonymous No.23263332]

>>23261741
So leftytrannies think there insulting right-winger by calling them a movie. I mean i know there not actually allowed to swear (besides saying fuck, so Ed-G) but really?

[Anonymous No.23263331]

>>23263324
>>23263279
dude
how does /lit/ breed pseuds of your caliber

[Anonymous No.23263343]

>>23263324
>God willing, in the matter of love we may be able to enforce one of two things—either that no one shall venture to touch any person of the freeborn or noble class except his wedded wife, or sow the unconsecrated and bastard seed among harlots, or in barren and unnatural lusts; or at least we may abolish altogether the connection of men with men; and as to women,
i don't even care, but you may be the most retarded poster on /lit/.

[Anonymous No.23263352]

>>23261630
Really hate how /lit/ is just another idpol focused place.

[Anonymous No.23263361]

finna chudmaxx this fine evening with some Homer and Sallust

[Anonymous No.23263366]

>>23263331
I'm genuinely curious where you get the idea that Plato argued for executing people for homosexual relations. What dialogue?

The stuff about "gays," seems to be the linchpin of your argument, since you've acknowledged that, yes, Plato was for radical wealth redistribution, yes, he says some things in favor of gender equality in terms of vocation, and yes, he is more of technocrat than a populist.

So, where is that?

I find it strange that Plato apparently called for death to all gays when he explicitly has Socrates argue for a battalion of gay lovers to serve in the military in the Symposium, ala the Sacred Band of Thebes who BTFO the Spartans.

Maybe you are referring to The Laws? But Plato doesn't say anything about "death an exile." Rather, he says same sex attraction is particularly overpowering and that it is bad for the same reason opposite sex lusts can be bad.

But then again, I am a retard who clearly hasn't read Plato, so hopefully you can clue me into how advocating for gay battalions is the same thing as wanting all gays killed or exiled.

[Anonymous No.23263378]

>>23263343
Ok, where is the "death and exile," here?

As I noted above, in The Laws, gay sex is seen as unnatural, and particularly pernicious, but for the same reasons that hetero sexual lusts can also be destructive.

You claimed he wanted gays killed for engaging in sex with men.

[Anonymous No.23263413]

>>23263366
>Plato was for radical wealth redistribution,
Not leftist. Nazis.
>he says some things in favor of gender equality in terms of vocation,
Not inherently leftist, unless you want to define "rightist" as whatever specific time period your RW boogeyman is.
>he is more of technocrat than a populist.
Populism is not rightist, you've already more or less said the same.
>>23263366
>Plato, so hopefully you can clue me into how advocating for gay battalions is the same thing as wanting all gays killed or exiled.
You haven't even remotely read plato.
>we shall be right in enacting that he be deprived of civic honours and privileges, and be deemed to be, as he truly is, a stranger. Let this law, then, whether it is one, or ought rather to be called two, be laid down respecting love in general, and the intercourse of the sexes which arises out of the desires, whether rightly or wrongly indulged.
This is one of the punishments listed for all unnatural lusts (which explicitly includes homosexual intercourse). It is the total stripping of all civil rights.

Advocating for gay battalions? Yes-- take it out of context and do ignore everything Plato writes that you dislike. Oh, the Symposium? Clearly Plato was writing his beliefs when he spoke of gay sex, clearly Pausanias and Aristophanes speak for the views of Plato (despite the latter being ridiculed by Plato), and not Socrates, whose role in the Symposium is to be the first to give a speech that speaks directly and favorably about hetereosexual intercourse. I'm guessing you're one of "those" people.
>Quite so, Socrates; and they are really fools, for how can a man be happy who is the servant of anything? On the contrary, I plainly assert, that he who would truly live ought to allow his desires to wax to the uttermost, and not to chastise them; but when they have grown to their greatest he should have courage and intelligence to minister to them and to satisfy all his longings. And this I affirm to be natural justice and nobility. To this however the many cannot attain; and they blame the strong man because they are ashamed of their own weakness, which they desire to conceal, and hence they say that intemperance is base. As I have remarked already, they enslave the nobler natures, and being unable to satisfy their pleasures, they praise temperance and justice out of their own cowardice.
>Plato, from Gorgias

[Anonymous No.23263423]

>>23261944
To be fair, the reaction I described is not universal. I observed a lot of anons noticing that the chudjak had a lot of jewish facial features and decided that the meme makes fun jews rather than themselves.

[Anonymous No.23263427]

>>23263413
Ah, so, by your estimation, since Plato includes fornication right next to homosexual relations in your quote, you think Plato is advocating for the death penalty for all relations outside of marriage?

[Anonymous No.23263428]

>>23263378
>As I noted above, in The Laws, gay sex is seen as unnatural, and particularly pernicious, but for the same reasons that hetero sexual lusts can also be destructive.
>Le... he's not le homophobe because... Because... Because he thought all sex was unnatural except procreative sex with women! Therefore he isn't homophobic!!
Oh my god anon
You are meme

[Anonymous No.23263434]

>>23263378
>But how can we take precautions against the unnatural loves of either sex, from which innumerable evils have come upon individuals and cities? How shall we devise a remedy and way of escape out of so great a danger?
>He's not a homophobe because... He's also against fornication!
It's over.

[Anonymous No.23263436]

>>23263413
Out of context?

[Anonymous No.23263444]

>>23263434
I see we've moved from the motte to the bailey, and on to the strawmen. I explicitly said Plato said homosexuality was unnatural. You claimed he wanted to have gays killed.

This particularly clashes with the Symposium, but it isn't even supportable by the Laws, unless you want to say the late Plato wanted all manner of people killed.

[Anonymous No.23263466]

>>23261630
One Fish
Two Fish
Red Fish
Blue Fish

[Anonymous No.23263470]

>>23263436
That is a quote from another speaker (Pausanias) whose views do not align with Plato. You literally are one of those that got his education from youtube and reddit top comments. You are a retard and a pseud. I even mentioned those that take Pausanias as the mouthpiece of Plato:
>. In Ionia and other places, and generally in countries which are subject to the barbarians, the custom is held to be dishonourable; loves of youths share the evil repute in which philosophy and gymnastics are held, because they are inimical to tyranny;

[Anonymous No.23263481]

>>23263444
It doesn't clash with the Symposium unless you believe that the other speakers are Plato's views. This is not supportable in the same way that Gorgias and Callicles do not state Plato's views, but you wouldn't know that because you graduated from the University of Reddit Top Comment.

[Anonymous No.23263540]

>>23263436
>But the men of Lacedaemon, holding that "if a man but lay his hand upon the body and for lustful purpose, he shall thereby forfeit claim to what is beautiful and noble"
Not to mention this is said about your gay warriors in Xenophon's take on the Symposium, which should be more "unbiased" since Xenophon himself was not much of a homophobe.

[Anonymous No.23263571]

>>23263470
Ah, so Plato only ever speaks through Socrates and we should treat Socrates as interchangeable with Plato and all others as foils presenting bad positions?

So Plato despises Pausanias' position?

[Anonymous No.23263578]

>>23263540
Ah, so a dialogue written by a different person with the same name is a better source for what Plato thought.

[Anonymous No.23263588]

>>23263436
>Ancient Greeks had the exact same conception of Homosexual love as we do today
>The only love and bond between two men can be lust and sex and in to way based on respect, loyalty and fraternity

>inb4 Spartans were gay

[Anonymous No.23263609]

>>23263588
Whose arguing that? I am interested in this Plato who wants to kill everyone who fucks outside of marriage apparently.

[Anonymous No.23263626]

>>23263571
You have to prove that Pausanias does, when Pausanias' views conflict with those found the the Laws, and Socrates' do not.
Just the same way that we can be sure Gorgias does not speak for Plato because his words are in conflict with words found in other parts of Plato's works.

In conclusion, a chud that reads Plato and takes it to heart will:
>Have new arguments against homosexuality.
>Become more staunchly opposed to liberalism.
>More favorable amenable to national socialism and its restructuring of wealth to support a middle class without needless plundering from the rich or outright communism of the "left", loosely what leftists decry as state cronyism.
>Have interesting racialist arguments from Menexenus to further entrench his racism
>Believe more firmly that hedonism is bad, and thus drugs, promiscuous sex, porn, etc., have worse positions in his mind.
>Be able to further entrench his morality, as Plato believes in objective morals (rather than subjectivity of Thrasymachus or various pre-Socratics)
Leftist things he may consider:
>Women should be able to prove themselves equal, if they are up to the task
>Communal raising of children, which Plato later withdrew to a large degree in the Laws
In other words, very chuddy and worthwhile for any chud to read, which is the purpose of this thread.

[Anonymous No.23263633]

>>23263609
In the republic his idea is more like:
everyone fucks everyone else in their own class, nobody can know who their children are, nobody can switch classes. Familial bonds are viewed as a source of instability. Idk about homosexuality specifically, but the atomic family was definitely not a part of Plato's plan, at least not for the elite class.

[Anonymous No.23263636]

>>23263609
The quote implies Greeks had homosexuality as we do today. There was no such thing as homosexuality as we understand it. There was Pedestry between a mature man and a per-pubescent child which we would term child abuse. There was the rough and unloving rape of a superior and the inferior. There was no tender, mutual love between that of equals.

[Anonymous No.23263638]

>>23263571
>>23263626
Besides, to say that Hitler does not fit into the modern definition of right wing because he was a vegetarian is retarded. All thinkers have idiosyncrasies, but that doesn't mean they can't be defined as right or left.

[Anonymous No.23263642]

>>23263638
>>23263571
Vegetarian animal rights activist*

[Anonymous No.23263648]

>>23261630
>I'm a chud
>What books should I read?

[Anonymous No.23263676]

To understand how altruism is useful and when exactly it becomes counter-productive you need The Selfish Gene or something similar.
Taking a general stance against altruism as a reaction against its extremes is retarded.
In normal stable conditions of a population of birds cooperation and trust works, only 1 out of a hundred will betray the cooperative principles. If the birds can freely move between groups or the local group is too large to keep track of individuals this breaks down and being a criminal is much more likely to work.

[Anonymous No.23263682]

>>23263633
Even the communal children thing was something Aristotle referred to as "from Socrates" when he referred to Plato's views as being from Plato himself (like the Ideas). Inferring from how Plato treats communal raising of children in the Laws, and there is a case to be made that Plato didn't see it as practical or realistic.

[Anonymous No.23263696]

>>23263682
nta but considering how Laconophilia was common even among these very Athenians, it's not hard to imagine maybe they had something in mind like the Spartan system

[Anonymous No.23263710]

>>23263696
If so, no homosexuality was involved (in Plato and Socrates' case) because of the consistent anti-sexuality message. Socrates demonstrates this in Alcibiades I (in a sense) and Symposium for instance by refusing to bed Alcibiades.

[Anonymous No.23263781]

>>23263626
The political right has been defined by a wholehearted embrace of capitalism and individualism for over a century. If you want to say Plato is on "the right" because he agrees with some of the tenants of national SOCIALISM (leaving out the identitarian racial ones notably), that's fine. That doesn't seem very right wing in the modern context though.

You have to go back 70+ years to not have the right joined at the hip with individualistic capitalism.

[Anonymous No.23263796]

>>23263636
Well, Russians are apparently still here into their dedovschina (punative gay rape), but hate "rainbow gays," so it's still a concept that is around today. Me, I think fucking men is pretty gay regardless of how you justify it to yourself as "dominance," but what do I know?

I'm a coward. I wouldn't even engage in one human wave attack for the Tsar, er... President. jej

[Anonymous No.23263811]

>>23263796
I love how their Telegram posts, be they about victories or losses, are always framed in analogies to gay sex. Video very related.

[Anonymous No.23263851]

>>23263696
The agoge, or systems like it, were common in many Grecian polis', the most famous was that of Lacedaemon. There is every reason to think that communal raising of the upper class children was not uncommon back then. At least in some form, be it major or minor.

[Anonymous No.23264033]

>>23263181
NTA
Any further info on these iq tests? How were they conducted, on what kind of group, how many, were they from a specific university or just a general population, etc...

[Anonymous No.23265299]

BUMP

[Anonymous No.23265412]

>>23263696
>nta but considering how Laconophilia was common even among these very Athenians, it's not hard to imagine maybe they had something in mind like the Spartan system
I think you're overrating how popular the Spartan systems were. There were plenty of pro-Athenian Athenians and for men like Cimon their Spartan sympathies were a political detriment.

[Anonymous No.23265416]

>>23261686
>>23261741
i kinda hate it because it's not cool. like there's no cool or badass edge to it apart from the fact that it kind of sounds like chad.

[Anonymous No.23265549]

>>23261630

[Anonymous No.23265554]

>>23261630
>>23265549
stefan molyneux.

[Anonymous No.23265770]

>>23265412
The Agoge was not unique to Sparta, but it was the most famous. Many famous Athenians sent their children to it as it produced desirable traits in men. Athens did not.

[Anonymous No.23265778]

>>23265554
I miss him and his ethnic studies.

[Anonymous No.23266989]

>>23261630
Nonfiction:
The Bell Curve
On Genetic Interests: Family, Ethnicity and Humanity in an Age of Mass Migration
Modernity and Cultural Decline: A Biobehavioral Perspective
War and Peace and War: The Rise and Fall of Empires
The Machiavellians: Defenders of Freedom
Democracy: The God That Failed

Fiction:
Demons/The Possessed
The Camp of the Saints
Starship Troopers

[Anonymous No.23267057]

>>23261635
kek

[Anonymous No.23267118]

>>23261741
>It was once again proven that the left can't meme.
The chudjack was triggering to /pol/ at first but memes move so fast nowadays, evolving too fast to be unpacked, and are so quickly recuperated or flipped around by the people who are the butt of the joke. To have any hope you have to learn how to volley back immediately, re-appropriate and re-deploy, and to play with language and imagery, otherwise you'll get played by them.

>>23262116
>Leftists are always too self-serious. That's why they can't meme.
I don't think that's true any longer, see Dark Brandon. Okay, this WAS true circa 2016. Really, the left (in a broad sense, liberals) had developed a reputation for grim humorlessness after they developed extreme anxiety, or logophobia and logophilia, over the meaning of words and images which never made any empirical or theoretical sense. If anything it just them in a thicket of hooey. For decades they more or less accepted the sort of research on strategic messaging that emerges out of academic communications programs. This teaches you that you must construct a compelling "narrative." You have to control the way an "issue" is publicly "framed" by the careful use of controlled phraseology and then repeat it over and over. Progressives concluded that all they need to do is control the way they talk, so they can control the way we think. Nothing improvised, loose, human: stay on message, prompter, talking points. But it makes you slow, stupid, and mechanical.

But they kept getting waylaid unexpectedly. Like, this is a big reason why Trump kicked their ass, and blew them away with "fake news," which was accomplished with the flick of a sentence. It took Democrats years to face up to that one. But they've learned to loosen up. The pro-Biden forces depicting Biden in a fascistic way (by re-appropriating extremist far-right language and memes) and adopting the name "Brandon" (soon after Trumpfags started saying "Let's go Brandon!") is an example of that. And the extreme incongruity of Brandon as a jocular dude who eats ice cream but who is also powerful and looks like Voldemort makes it funny, and funny makes it stick. Nobody thought the Democrats had it in them.

[Anonymous No.23267130]

[Anonymous No.23267187]

>>23267118
The memes against the left remain timeless. There is something inherent to leftists of today that make is so a simple depiction of a hairy tranny triggers them endlessly, and the best they can do to "reappropriate" it is to create AI generated anime girls with the same colors and themes.

As for Dark Brandon, it was retarded from the start. Nobody considered it funny or a fitting description of reality, and it was astroturfed by several media companies to maintain any relevancy. It lacks the self-deprecating self-awareness that rightoids have, where a rightoid will unironically depict Trump as a retarded baboon pooping on leftists because they think it's funny and an accurate description of Trump and their politics. Leftists have none of this self-deprecating nature- similar to how Dark Brandon is supposed to be a compliment and in no way a deprecation of any of Biden's characteristics, trannies do not adopt the trooner in the same way that /pol/faggots adopted the chud; They use extremely unrealistic depictions of what they see themselves as (those anime "enbies" that they love). Chuds even go so far as to straight up adopt the idealized depiction of a tranny- with a chudjak dating a tranny, killing an anime tranny, or whatever, for no other reason than that it is funny.

Leftists can't compete, and I think it's related to the fact that as a politically and socially marginalized group, /pol/fags have learned that stigma is normal and accepted. Most of their friends and family would disown them for their beliefs, employer would fire them, girlfriend leave them, etc. They are able to just go along with whatever because that's what they've done all their life.

[Anonymous No.23267193]

>>23267187
(This was a phonepost on the clock btw, so it's hectic)

[Anonymous No.23267211]

>>23267118
>pro-Biden forces depicting Biden in a fascistic way
Wasn't that just the Spencer-adjacent retards?

[Anonymous No.23267215]

>>23261944
Being able to breed is a human right

[Anonymous No.23267229]

>>23267118
>>23267130
Actually, what was funny about dark brandon is that it was a completely non-self aware meme. When a leftist tries to depict their figurehead (that falls down stairs and off bikes, enters complete incoherence on live TV, etc) as a Voldemort grandpa that likes icecream, it's funny because it's out of touch. The incogruity isn't between Ice Cream Grandpa and Voldemort, it's between the Leftists view of Biden and how they depict him.

Rightoids turned it into Dark Brandon (how leftists perceive his faults) and shitting himself and having his diaper changed by Secret Service, which was an actually funny incogruity.

[Anonymous No.23267259]

>>23267229
Incongruity* I hate phoneposting.

[Anonymous No.23267272]

>>23267187
>a rightoid will unironically depict Trump as a retarded baboon pooping on leftists
Well to your point, I was looking at right-wing Xitter the other day and saw one Trump supporter using the name President Blumph with the squashed Trump meme, which I thought was funny. It's not my account, and I'm not a Trump supporter, I really did think it was funny, or self-aware and cognizant of the fact that Trump is not actually playing 5D chess. I could imagine myself getting along with this guy even if we disagree on politics, while I probably wouldn't with a belligerent boomer who is still really invested in the Trump fantasy and is trying to redpill people.

>trannies do not adopt the trooner in the same way that /pol/faggots adopted the chud
Well I read something recently that "troon" was originally used by trannies at Something Awful because it's similar to "goon." A trans goon. The SA forums has long had that kind of self-deprecating humor and the politics there lean left. And it didn't have the punch and history of words like "fag" "dyke" and "trannie." Then it worked its way to the right and lots of kiwifags are convinced they invented the word but they didn't. To have some fun and play it with it more, the troon word is a trans Bene Gesserit psyop to make the word trannie slowly disappear in the language of their enemies so they can eventually recuperate it and use it for themselves. The word do sound good.

[Anonymous No.23267320]

>>23267272
>Well I read something recently that "troon" was originally used by trannies at Something Awful because it's similar to "goon." A trans goon. The SA forums has long had that kind of self-deprecating humor and the politics there lean left. And it didn't have the punch and history of words like "fag" "dyke" and "trannie." Then it worked its way to the right and lots of kiwifags are convinced they invented the word but they didn't. To have some fun and play it with it more, the troon word is a trans Bene Gesserit psyop to make the word trannie slowly disappear in the language of their enemies so they can eventually recuperate it and use it for themselves. The word do sound good.
Sure, but I'm talking about the memetic depiction rather than the word itself.

But yeah, even if you are a tranny-supporting leftist that hates white people, I can respect you infinitely more than an ignorant boomertard that thinks Trump is le Genius and the second coming of Jesus. It's okay to realize that Joe Biden is in the advanced stages of senility (and probably dementia) but to also believe that Joe Biden is better than Trump. Most leftists don't do this because they are extremely sensitive to biting critiques, and there is a lot more social pressure to conform on the left. On the right, there is much more diversity of political views and self-criticism.

[Anonymous No.23267364]

>>23267118
Dark Brandon and Jojo’s Bizarre Adventure Biden were the only successful left-wing memes because like you said they capture the offensive fascistic energy of RW meme culture. They kinda lost their way since then as all they’ve produced recently is the horribly cringey NAFO doge memes which are also based on a corruption of RW energy “what if liberalism was BASED and DROPPED BOMBS on da chuddies and muslims and russians”. Recently the only shit I’ve seen them come up with is accusing RW activists of being brown or making pro-Jewish memes that allude to Jewish supremacy as a real and good thing. All their attempts at memes are just concern trolling using hastily reoriented chud concepts, which ultimately only reifies a fascistic worldview.

[Anonymous No.23267396]

>>23267320
>Most leftists don't do this because they are extremely sensitive to biting critiques, and there is a lot more social pressure to conform on the left.
Yeah it's a kind of black/white thinking. The way the split on the left goes, is that you deny that he's senile or is some stage of it, if you're on Biden's team. Or if you're a Cornel West supporter or are voting for the PSL showboat because of Gaza, then Biden and Trump are just the same -- which is not something that I think most people on the right believe.

>But yeah, even if you are a tranny-supporting leftist that hates white people,
More of a broad left-center unity type, but it's funny you say that because I found President Blumph through another guy I was looking at who was a right-center unity guy with a Alberto Fujimori avatar, who thinks Tim Pool is an idiot and he's like: we want to win but the hardline pro-lifers think they can pray actual political hurdles away. It's like, yeah, that makes sense, and if I lost politically to this guy, well, that's fair.

[Anonymous No.23267419]

>>23267272
>Well I read something recently that "troon" was originally used by trannies at Something Awful because it's similar to "goon." A trans goon.
The right steals terminology from the left all the time. "Cancel culture", "woke", and "groomer" are some recent examples.

[Anonymous No.23267429]

>>23267187
>a rightoid will unironically depict Trump as a retarded baboon pooping on leftists
"A" rightoid might do that, but most of them take themselves way too seriously to ever have a creative idea.

[Anonymous No.23267448]

>>23267419
That's because everything you like is bad.
Every single word you use to describe things you like will quickly become a slur, because everything you like is bad.

[Anonymous No.23267463]

>>23265416
it sounds like a portmanteau of chad and stud

[Anonymous No.23267470]

>>23267118
>see Dark Brandon
Dark Brandon is just an astroturfed copying of Dark MAGA lmao. It's not even funny since Brandon is such a senile retard that you can't even meme him into being based like you maybe could with another leftist like Macron (JVPITER)

[Anonymous No.23267478]

>>23267272
>Trump supporter
Blumph is a right wing anti-Trump meme that makes fun of him for being just another Zionist conservicuck (LOWEST BLACK UNEMPLOYMENT!!), not a pro Trump meme

[Anonymous No.23267487]

>>23267448
If you say so.

[Anonymous No.23267495]

>>23267429
imagine thinking that these people and some hyperborea twitter chud are in the same ballpark

[Anonymous No.23267510]

>>23267495
I mean, they both believe the same Tom Clancy conspiracy theories and share very similar social values. The biggest difference is that the average MAGA retard doesn't masturbate to hentai.

[Anonymous No.23267538]

>>23267510
ironic

[Anonymous No.23267539]

>>23267495
The hyperboreans came from Atlantis with seeds of the Hermetic tradition that was adopted by the mystery schools that educated the templars and lead to western science. The packets of knowledge that seeded the future are depicted in ancient carvings globally as handbags. Twitter is demonic.
>>23267510
Without having read a word of his books I assume Clancy is a government propagandist like most "conspiracy theorists" are.

Lern2chud faggots.

[Anonymous No.23267545]

>>23267510
Very out of touch.
I have a far-left branch of my family and a boomer MAGA tard branch. The MAGA tards are all interracial relationship lovers (I am mixed because of it), they support economic conservativism, and their only intersection with 4chuds is that both want to undo some progressive policies that are quite fucking insane. MAGA tards are israel loving liberals with 1990s era liberal social values. A 4chan chud would mercilessly slaughter MAGA boomers if given the chance.

[Anonymous No.23267551]

>>23267545
some guys are just mixed
thats just how it is now

[Anonymous No.23267568]

>>23267538
I never claimed that the left isn't overloaded with embarrassing hysteria. I consider myself liberal minded, but I still despise enormous factions of modern leftism. Some of the shit in that list is truly reaching though lol

[Anonymous No.23267581]

>>23267545

[Anonymous No.23267587]

>>23267545
chud here
I don't know about slaughtering them, but I would hardly consider "gay race communism, but a little slower" to be a fellow right winger

[Anonymous No.23267608]

>>23267545
>>23267510
Actually, if you've ever seen the psychotic college white women screeching during a protest, it looks exactly the same as the MAGA boomers, because they are fundamentally the same thing; The MAGA boomer is a far-left progressive liberal that has been left behind by the continuous leftwards advancement of the Overton Window. A 4chud is going in an entirely different direction. The only similarity is that from your perspective, they generally appear to be in the opposite direction that you're going, thus you lump them all together. This is fine politically, a win for either one is a loss for you, but when you say things like that it just makes you obviously ignorant.

[Anonymous No.23267615]

>>23267608
>The MAGA boomer is a far-left progressive liberal
Ahahahahaha.

[Anonymous No.23267617]

>>23267545
They don't need to be slaughtered but they should all be put in pens and have their ankles clipped to avoid serving foreign countries any further.

[Anonymous No.23267626]

>>23267615
Yes. The average MAGA boomer, placed in the 1960s, would support marijuana, race mixing, gay rights, and more. They would be seen as radically progressive. They just didn't get the progressive memo and got left behind.
You are fucking retarded.

[Anonymous No.23267638]

>>23267229
Nevermind the dementia, it's difficult to give the guy a cult of personality when there is footage of him getting handsy and nosey with kids. Maybe the joke is that he's Dark Brandon because he can get away with that.

[Anonymous No.23267641]

>>23267626
The reason for this is that they do not disagree with modern day liberals on any actual philosophical point. The MAGAtard still agrees with the tenants of the enlightenment, liberalism, equality, liberty, etc., but they have "outdated" beliefs on what that entails. Modern progressivism has more or less agreed that equality and liberty are only possible by enforced equity, something boomers disagree with, but they do not disagree on the overall objective (equality and liberty).

The chud is in a class of his own, because he rejects the basic tenants of the modern left and right. He has completely abandoned the modern political arena.

[Anonymous No.23267650]

>>23267626
>The average MAGA boomer, placed in the 1960s, would support marijuana, race mixing, gay rights, and more
None of this is true, btw, other than maybe race mixing. You're acting like MAGAs were the demographic following The Grateful Dead around in vans, but that's cartoonishly out of touch. It's possible there was a small amount of overlap, but the few that were are the types that had a conservative revelation in their early 30s when they started making money.

[Anonymous No.23267659]

>>23267650
Your opinions on what they believe are informed by reddit, twitter, and liberal journalists very obviously. I live in the bible belt south and have known a lot of MAGA boomers. You are completely out of touch. What do you guys say? Oh yeah, please touch some grass.

[Anonymous No.23267667]

>>23267659
>liberal journalists
lmao. See, this is where your closed loop worldview does its first loop. I could name any news outlet and you'd call it liberal propaganda. The conspiracy can't be disproven because any proof is part of the conspiracy.

[Anonymous No.23267672]

>>23267667
liberals do be hijacking a lot of institutions tho

[Anonymous No.23267673]

>>23267667
???
Go outside, find a MAGA boomer, ask them if they support gay marriage. Unironically touch the grass. God you're so ignorant.

[Anonymous No.23267678]

>>23267667
>I could name any news outlet and you'd call it liberal propaganda.
And he would be correct.

[Anonymous No.23267692]

>>23261686
You can’t insult incels because they already know they are subhuman so they will just adopt the insult. The fact that leftists are too afraid of being offensive to come up with a real insult doesn’t help either.

[Anonymous No.23267696]

>>23267692
What is more offensive than
>Incel
>Subhuman
>Polnigger
>Dysgenic repressed homosexual
>Cannibalistic Humanoid Undeground Dweller
>Little peepee
And all of the numerous attempts that continuously fall flat? Come up with a real insult and don't be a pussy.

[Anonymous No.23267702]

>>23267696
Well being white is good, and being right wing is good, so any possible term you could use to describe those things will end up becoming a compliment, just like every single attempt to rebrand niggers ends up becoming an insult for niggers.

[Anonymous No.23267715]

This board has been really really really fucking bad this week

[Anonymous No.23267746]

>>23267715
a bloo bloo.

[Anonymous No.23267760]

>>23267715
beginning of q2, plenty of time to turn it around boss

[Anonymous No.23267770]

>>23267702
>Well being white is good, and being right wing is good, so any possible term you could use to describe those things will end up becoming a compliment
Lol I've had people sperg out at me like lunatics in threads for using the term "alt-right". Rightoids get insanely buttmad about that one.

[Anonymous No.23267779]

>>23267770
That isn't because they're personally offended, they just get an autismal need to define the difference between the modern capitalist left (what redditors consider "right wing") the alt-right (broadly libertarian and extremely socially conservative), and chud-right (typically crypto-socialist and ultra-socially conservative).

[Anonymous No.23267787]

>>23267770
they act like a bunch of jews when they are called out very unseemly

[Anonymous No.23267788]

>>23267779
>That isn't because they're personally offended
What do you think "offended" even means?

[Anonymous No.23267789]

>>23267770
They aren't personally offended, they're sperging out about definitions. Similar to how leftists sperg out about the difference between a progressive neo-liberal and breadtuber.

[Anonymous No.23267793]

>>23267779
>chud-right
I feel like I'm living in a fever dream.

[Anonymous No.23267799]

>>23267788
>What do you think "offended" even means?
Because the anon you were replying to was talking about offending someone with a personal attack, like "incel." But of course, if you think someone correcting you about terminology is offended, then sure you offend them all. I'm offended by trying to correct you, you're offended by my use of the words "personally offended."

[Anonymous No.23267801]

>>23261686
Literally always happens.

[Anonymous No.23267802]

>>23267799
Calling them alt-right is a personal attack. I haven't claimed otherwise.

[Anonymous No.23267806]

>>23265416
It's kinda cool.
>they're not staying down there anymore
I mean, yeah. Why should we? I identify with this lil nigga.

[Anonymous No.23267811]

>>23267806
our mattresses are NOT STAINED

[Anonymous No.23267819]

>>23267802
In what way? I've corrected the use of alt-right before and never felt insulted at all. I wonder how your regular use of normie media shapes your emotions during disagreements on places like this. You must feel like people disagreeing with you are as offended and angry as they might be on reddit (because arguments tend to only happen when someone has a strong emotional reason to do so) whereas here chuds tend to argue just because it's funny or something to do between shitposts on work break.

[Anonymous No.23267830]

>>23267806
>like the underground man, hidden away from the world
>le... dangerous!!1
>menace to society
>strikes when it's least expected
>badass claws
>grabs a qt3.14's feet in the shower
Tell me what's insulting about the based C.H.U.D.?

[Anonymous No.23267831]

>>23267770
>Lol I've had people sperg out at me like lunatics in threads for using the term "alt-right".
I don't know if I would sperg out, but would disagree that they're solid right wingers, they're just dudes you realized the MSM is full of faggots and whatever they try to frame as bad is actually good, which is like the absolute bare minimum of right wingery.

[Anonymous No.23267835]

>>23267830
Unironically, I think it should be embraced.
You say I'm a gross unsightly think that should stay hidden away on the fringes of society, and I say "too bad. I'm not staying down here anymore".
It's empowering.

[Anonymous No.23267841]

>>23267835
It already has been. Chuds have been making chudjaks for a long time.

[Anonymous No.23267881]

>>23262981
Stop

the

Reddit

spacing

,

(you)

are

on

4chan

.

[Anonymous No.23267886]

>>23267806
I find it quite funny that their insult is derived from creatures that were homeless people horribly mutated by the governments illegal chemical dumping.

[Anonymous No.23267905]

>>23267886
>Rightoid suddenly cares about the homeless

[Anonymous No.23267927]

>>23267881
>he's spitting the newfag meme.
I don't have them on hand but 4chan (and basic email) had double carriage returns before reddit existed.

Virtually all stickys on all boards have "reddit spacing" because the ability to easily separate discrete ideas is what distinguishes there writing of an adult to the ramblings of a child.

Go back to tiktok or the sharty, zoomzoom

[Anonymous No.23267958]

>>23267927
Of course two line breaks have always occurred. It was much rarer before the 2016 invasion, and even before the project scientology 2012 invasion (I joined 4chan from newgrounds in 2010 or so, so not a real oldfag).
What makes your post easily distinguishable is the frequent separation of two or three two clause sentences by the double line breaks, and the lack of any other form of structure in your post.

Many other anons used double line breaks ITT but no one called them out, because it is done in a very natural way, uncharacteristic of a redditorm

[Anonymous No.23267966]

>>23267927
And separating single sentences by a line break during an attempt at a formal argument, which is VERY reddit.

[Anonymous No.23267980]

>>23267905
Yeah, we generally don't like our towns looking like your leftist homeless cities.

[Anonymous No.23268000]

The Reddit obsession in the last few odd years is one of the characteristics of a dying site. Being anti- has led to some stale echo chamber. It was the personalities of oldfags who gave 4chan pop. Now nigs is just concerned with not being like that site I don’t like. No one can even describe what reddit means when used as an adjective

[Anonymous No.23268019]

>>23268000
Reddit is essentially just a synonym for normie, but there are specific idiosyncracies about redditors like atrocious self-referential humor, smug superiority despite extreme ignorance (the top comment effect), and an obsession with the group consensus.
The last one is something redditors like to harp on about on 4chan "4chan hivemind! 4chan hivemind!" but that betrays the fact that they are so accustomed to total group consensus that they cannot see that every single thread on every single board is full of disagreements from the top down. No two chuds are exactly alike. Some believe society should kill all blacks. Some literally are black. Their views are unified by being things you could get banned for on reddit, so the redditor thinks it all looks the same for lack of experience.

[Anonymous No.23268030]

>>23268000
this post has all the hallmarks of a filthy redditor
>doesn't understand why everyone hates reddit
>thinks hating reddit is "just being contrarian"
>thinks people being permitted to express themselves is "an echo chamber"
People hate reddit because it's a radical leftist psyop that uses all of the most underhanded forms of censorship in an attempt to create a consensus around supporting the most idiotic, self destructive leftist policies imaginable.

[Anonymous No.23268046]

>>23268030
Exactly. I was going to say that another aspect of reddit is constant appeals to authority, the majority, or normalcy.
>Popper said X
>Redditor: Popper is like... widely regarded as being a poor commentator.
This kind of thinking is normal for a redditor, because making your own judgement about a statement is uncommon.

[Anonymous No.23268048]

>>23268019
>>23268030
So is being 4chan just being /pol/ now? Many anons are indistinguishable from each other. They could literally be bots or samefagging. Look at all the recycled threads and paint by numbers replies. Anons constantly calling Reddit always give the impression they found 4chan in the last few years because it is based and redpilled or whatever. Seems like they are trying too hard to fit in and make their whole 4chan persona about posting on 4chan.

In b4 Redditor or newfag. I was on /b/ in the 00’s closer to its heyday

[Anonymous No.23268066]

>>23268048
No faggot, it's because the way 4chan is designed makes controlling narratives more difficult for leftycuck moderators, which is the exact opposite of reddit.

[Anonymous No.23268085]

>>23268048
Again, it all looks indistinguishable to you because you see every disagreement as the exact same thing. You have a reddit mindset.
But of course, there are a lot of newfags that try to go with whatever is le based. The problem is that reddit leftist views aren't just different, they're also stupid. In a place where you can practice free thought without getting banned, there is a sort of expectation that you'll at least stop repeating the objectively retarded points.

For example, native 4chan leftists tend to agree Jews have a disproportionate amount of economic and political influence because they have been exposed to the essentially irrefutable proof of it. They just don't think it matters, which is fine.

[Anonymous No.23268167]

>>23267927
You

are

doing

it

every

other

sentence

while

usually

it

's

used

after

many

sentences

,

this

shows

you

are

doing

it

the

reddit

way

>newfag
Never said that.

[Anonymous No.23268174]

>>23267118
it's funny you mention Dark Brandon because a few months prior to its debut, Dark MAGA was a meme made by hard right twitter frogs then literal media members and WH staffers put glasses on Biden and called it Dark Brandon. Maybe as emblematic of "the Left Can't Meme" as any meme there is

[Anonymous No.23268214]

>>23268174
Jesus Christ. Some of you need to get off the internet and get a life. If you can write and understand this jibberish it’s time for a break

[Anonymous No.23268253]

>>23268214

[Anonymous No.23268600]

>>23263016
>He cared about sad incel losers
>Except all the people recruiting and propagandizing to all the sad loners on /pol/ like me.
It'd be a lot harder for /pol/ to make this claim if literally everyone right of /pol/ wasn't also making this claim. 80 years of allied propaganda would have most people believe that the Nazis were bitter, pathetic, hated losers in the 20's who rose to become extremely powerful but inhumane monsters in the 30's. It's not surprising that sad incel losers buy into Nazi ideology when leftists keep telling them that Goebbels and Hitler were also sad loners, transformed by Nazism's worship of strength into some of the most powerful men alive.

[Anonymous No.23268616]

>>23261686
>tfw friend group started using chud as a term of endearment

[Anonymous No.23268800]

>>23261630
Dune + Dune Messiah

A dude takes a hallucinogenic drug to see the future and rides giant worms and eventually becomes space Hitler killing billions

[Anonymous No.23269226]

>>23268600
It's either that or getting their autism and insecurities preyed upon by groomers, /r9k/ had dedicated groups for just that. Although I'm not sure if they are still around.
It's depressing that so many people revolve their self worth around women (or lack thereof). Love is a lot more important and plenty of people that get laid end up struggling with that.

[Anonymous No.23269238]

>>23261630
If you have a functional penis, then it's not possible to be an ''incel'', precisely because prostitutes and the like exist.

[Anonymous No.23269841]

>>23269238
Prostitution is illegal in many places, so you're compelled not to do it by law. Does that make you a compcel instead?

[Anonymous No.23269876]

>>23263170
>You can't refute theorists as their is nothing to refute. It is opinion vs opinion.
That isn't what theory means in a scientific context. Theory is the model of explanation for something we know is true. For example, we know gravity is true, and theory is what explains how we know it's true (aka. the specific physical models involved).

This is obviously far more grounded in objectivity than an "opinion".

[Anonymous No.23269899]

>>23262116
What are you even talking about, they mock themselves constantly

[Anonymous No.23270057]

Gulag Archipelago followed by 10 hours of Jordan Peterson and Pewdiepie

[Anonymous No.23270075]

>>23269841
Some laws are stupid and should be disregarded as they make life more dangerous for the people doing them, prostitution is one of them.

Sex is readily available if you know where to look and drop unnatural and warped Christian beliefs, i'm talking about ''massage parlours'' and things like escort sites, street corner prozzies should generally be avoided as they're usually on drugs. Very few people actually get in trouble for having sex with prostitutes, the police have bigger things to worry about.

[Anonymous No.23270105]

>>23270075
>Some laws are stupid and should be disregarded as they make life more dangerous for the people doing them, prostitution is one of them.
I agree, but that doesn't automatically translate to breaking that law law being worth the risk.

[Anonymous No.23270226]

>>23270105
I think if ''incels'' were actually so desperate for a fuck they would risk it, but what i actually think they want is some sort of connection to someone else, not sex itself, so even then ''incel'' is a poor choice of word.

I am the opposite really, i could get women but i was never bothered about relationships, just sex, and nearly anyone would do even if the women were 20 years older than me. You can feel a connection to a woman without being in a relationship, go talk to your mother or sister if you have one.

[Anonymous No.23270236]

>>23263232
It's not a joke. We're just calling you ugly.

[Anonymous No.23270492]

>>23261630
Houellebecq
>>23261851
don't fall for this meme.

[Anonymous No.23270520]

>>23267831
The mainstream media is kinda shit, but it's far more broadly correct about things than shizoid and hysterical alt media.

[Anonymous No.23270554]

>>23270226
The label is a way to avoid facing real problems by pretending all that matters is petty hedonism. Ted only killed those people because he didn't get his dick sucked enough, it has nothing to do with the industrial revolution and its consequences. All the horrible things our decisions cause aren't actually happening, it's just guys complaining about not having sex. Nobody could have done anything to avoid WW2 and similar violent events because they're purely due to sexual frustration of low status men.
Notice how easy and soothing this worldview is. There's nothing to actually worry about, all problems are caused by the people pointing out problems.
This view is still promoted in mainstream academia with a straight face and no awareness of its origins in communist propaganda.

[Anonymous No.23270599]

>>23270554
>the industrial revolution was bad!!!
>we need to go back to cultivating the fields for 18 hours a day in permanent serfdom
>hopefully at least 2 of my 10 kids survive polio, so they can feed me when i become elderly at age 48

[Anonymous No.23270605]

lol fucking chuds

[Anonymous No.23270639]

>>23262647
names of all the books in the pic?

[Anonymous No.23270647]

>>23261630
The Story of Civilization by Will Durant is peak chudcore.

[Anonymous No.23270698]

>>23270599
Why are you like this? What did I say about serfdom?
Someone always has to pay for decay eventually. Justifying degeneracy always comes from selfish reasons, you want to be the all devouring decay and not have to think about the consequences.

[Anonymous No.23270954]

>>23263123
>Let's set aside the talk about jews being morally decadent
In my view, I believe this to be as intellectually, Jews are a rootless, groundless people. The monopolization of intellectual circles by the Jews is a, relatively speaking, new occurrence, it only occurred within the last 100-150 years. As for before, it was all Western men, Western men for the last 2000 years, so when the Jews penetrated such circles, they were free to explore without being tied down to dogma, tradition, and so on. Is this a good thing? Yes and no. Jewish history was cyclical, they were just fleeing from a certain area, and coming into another, this has been true for the majority of their history. The intellectual tradition of the Jews is sparse, in my view. We've lost alot of what our civilization developed in the last 2000 years.

[Anonymous No.23270991]

>>23262317
>>23262225
Plato is anti-democrat because he lived in fucking late Athens, if you survived that and were still pro-democracy you were legitimately mentally ill

[Anonymous No.23271327]

Three quarters of the posts in this thread are imaginary.
There is no answering to the question 'how', it's just how it is. The reason they are imaginary is because they're made up by discord users who exist outside of the site. You can repost and fill up to the character limit with your shit but no one will buy it because you're from some shitty discord channel and probably use redd0t as well.
Btw, your meme is shit.

[Anonymous No.23271904]

>>23271327
You're having a psychotic episode, anon. Please see a doctor.

[Anonymous No.23272867]

GPS by Albert North Shitehead

[Anonymous No.23273851]

>>23271904
This post is imaginary.

[Anonymous No.23273906]

>>23261952
Fuck all that noise
Read everything by Gregory Shaw, James Hillman, Iamblichus, and Deleuze, and realize that modern neoplatonists are a bunch of Aryan Pharisees.

[Anonymous No.23274216]

>>23262805
It comes from /int/ thoughregardless

[Anonymous No.23275053]

>>23262716
you should kill yourself

[Anonymous No.23275169]

>>23262317
B00kmark

[Anonymous No.23275666]

>>23261630
The Autobiography of Joe Rogan

[Anonymous No.23276741]

>>23270647
No it isn't, particularly his whole reason for writing it was that he thought a knowledge of Western history and the history of ideas would steer people away from radical ideologies.

I have come to the conclusion that Chuds just claim authors based on hazy ideas about what they wrote, and never actually read them, which is the only way you get stupid claims like "Durant and Aristotle and Aquinas are totally like us guys!"

[Anonymous No.23276756]

>>23261944
I see that this meme still works exceptionally well. I too am an owner of this meme and it always nets me many (you)s friend. Keep it around, it's a classic.