Who else is /social conservative/ here?

Who else is /social conservative/ here?

Other urls found in this thread:

plato.stanford.edu/entries/max-stirner/
uk.isidewith.com/political-quiz
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Spooks have no place here

I wouldn't quite call myself actually reactionary but others would likely see me that way

spooks are actually good

lmao I forgot about that word filter

I wouldn't necessarily say that I'm actually reactionary, but I do think that you need prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that any proposed social change would benefit society.
Take polyamory for example, polyamorous relationships have higher rates of abuse than monogamous ones. But even if that weren't the case I still wouldn't be pro-polyamory. I'd need conclusive evidence that it's better than monogamy before I'd be ok with it tbh.

Source?

I have a strong sense that the monogamous unit must be the only socially acceptable one, but I'm kind of borderline woman hateric, women's sexual selection seems to be dysgenic in many cases.
inb4 fedora

It has nothing to do with moralism necessarily but social self-interests.
Rather, the simple factor that individuals who are raised within "traditional" family unit tend to have lower margins for mental illness and higher social functionality when compared to single parent households and those who are raised by state in orphanages.

It's also the only way to avoid civilization ruining polygamy.

You don't say?

Christian socialist reporting in

be gone, spook

...

Yay! There's three of us! Three of us!

bihhh what about me??????

I fail to see how you can call yourself a leftist and still want to sacrifice yourself for the benefit of an authority figure.

It's for the Greater Good.

oops

*four

I don't know what I am, I don't feel as though I belong in the any Conservative or Liberal parties :(

...

I want to piss in the face of every social conservative.

Pretty much.

Are you Amerikkkan? Because that's one hell of a false dichotomy.

Only the ones with their backs to the wall of course.

Polyamory isn't socially accepted. So any claims on whether or not something does better than other is worthless. But in your next sentence you basically said, that even if it's not the case you are against it, because reasons.

Good thing you are against it, so these evidences will never pop up

No, I'm not a closeted homosexual.

Yeah, but like most imageboards Holla Forums is filled to the brim with dysfunctional individuals, as any thread on the personal lives of its posters attests

"no"

Ever think that the majority of posters don't post in those threads? This is an anonymous image board, why would I want to blog about my personal life, especially if I'm not an attention whore?

"no"

Come on m8, you're fighting a losing battle if you want to convince anyone that well-adjusted, normal individuals comprise the majority of imageboard posters


I meant that the argument in 1754996 is essentially circular

It's an argument that can't be refuted, because any evidence against polyamorous couples in favour of monogamous couples is just more proof that society isn't sufficiently tolerant of polyamorous couples, not that it's just an objectively worse form of household organisation

I want to personally torture all social conservatives to death.

Inb4 "ur proving our point lel XD"

OP, go fuck yourself.

You one spooked motherfucker.

There is nothing spooky about giving yourself into service of the grater good, rather it is righteous, even predetermined.

THE GREATER GOOD

we may be spooked but at least we're not anarchists :)

Feels good man.

...

At least we managed to fulfill our historic duty in the eastern Europe, dragging it out form its slave society period to feudalism ironically crating framework for further reformers of Christianity in form of Teutonic order that latter turned to Prussia, greater vessel for forces of history to drag humanity form feudalism to modern period.

lads what does spook mean

i'm new here :3

>This entire post

read dis

no just explain it to me pls

Me tbh

If you can't read then this really isn't the place for you unfortunately. I mean you can stick around if you want but you probably won't enjoy it.

Read 1000 times

Cliff notes version:
plato.stanford.edu/entries/max-stirner/

social conservatism =/= being reactionary.

Nah, I'm British

Basically any concept that dominates your mind that has no basis in reality.

wrong

Social conservativism is inherently reactionary, its goal is to maintain the capitalist balance of power.

...

this person is a pragmatic techno-nihilist there is nothing here i can't find from Land or any other nrx fag

Yes because banning abortions and gay marriage is totally profitable for capitalists…really made me think.

Oh and drugs. Can't forget about drugs. Sooo profitable for the capitalists to not legalize it.

You are aware that it was the french revolution that ultimately brought the guild-systems down, a far better format of trade unions(when it came to job security or services that they provided) that was sanctioned by state priori to birth capitalism?
In addition the french revolution brought an end to the ideal and potential for formation of universal monarchy in Europe by stopping the french form becoming part of Hapsburg empire?

Take this.

uk.isidewith.com/political-quiz

Can we get a better definition of what "social conservative" means in this context?

More children equals more slaves, porky loves that shit.


Can't be a productive slave if you're high all the time.

>>>Holla Forums

And there are also arguments between the ruling class. The "socially liberal" can keep the population up by importing browns and they are totally willing to make money off of selling drugs.

Capitalist democracy gives us such great choices!

Don't even know what to say, are all succdems this idiotic?

Except those raised in "traditional" family are dysfunctional neurotic fuckwads suffering from self-loathing

I`m not apologizing for Feudalism, since it died at the dawn of 18th century, but rather arguing against the French revolution. Universal monarchy would have lead into pan-European superstate by the dawn of 19th century ultimately leading into much more peaceful transitional period into socialism. Nationalism would have no starting point, no ww1 and more universal trade unions and socialist movement at the 20th century.
French revolution was the turning point in history where status quo was replaced by competition between nation-states, creation of conscription based national armies and far more bloodier wars.

all the more reason for revolution

What is even the point of social conservatism? Traditions aren't inherently valuable.

They are an effective means for social engineering, this is why Robespierre tough that Cult of the Supreme Being was necessary and why Mao`s cultural revolution was essential for eradication of all cultural and social ties to capitalism/feudalism. Same goes for early attempts at secularization in Soviet Union.

I'm polish, so I was brought up as catholic even though I wasn't really sure if God existed. Used to be an alt-right doos voolt faggot for a while until I found "de-classcucking memes for commie proles" on facebook and read some stuff. Found out /leftpol/ wasn't actually into faggot tumblr shit and read ego. Really liked it, so I just went down the list people compiled.

But it was only until reading "The Kingdom of God is Within You" that I actually started believing in God. Tolstoy really resonates with me despite the fact that he was apparently pretty crazy and kind've an asshole. So I guess in that respect I'm conservative, but I don't think violently murdering gays, trannies, or any other hedonist is right.

It just shows that you completely missed the point. You failed to provide the source, because I doubt said sources exist, because the samples are just too fucking small to exist, because there are not enough polyamorous couples to begin with.

No but I am pro-life.

so i can be anti-capitalist, but still not want people to do things that make me feel icky inside

Who is that Christian anime girl? I want to pet her head. So cute.

The only point is to divide the proles.

Don't delude yourself. Repeating your point while refusing to provide sources and posting passive insults isn't winning. Are the majority of imageboard users raised by polyamarous couples? I must have missed that thread.

no not really you conservatives need to loosen up once in a while and enjoy a drink and a smoke

Christ-chan.
It's OC.

Reminder that churches are hotbeds of reactionary sentiment, have always sided with porky against socialism, and that all religious people support some policy that makes marginalized groups lives miserable

christians deserve to be shot

inb4 euphoric

no stop this

this


gtfo

ah, the mind of the spooked

I think of myself as one forth a fascist

Social Conservatives get the bullet.

...

No surprises here.

I want the Tau to leave please and thank you

...

Such as individual agency? :^)

Who the fuck is talking about the church? Priests are the worst of them all.

Yes, actually.
If you think that individuals have complete agency, that is.

Borgs love organized religion.
It's a good way to keep you on your knees, while still managing to capitalism seem "moral".

Except that's exactly what a spook is, spook

...

thats the most unscientific way you could approach that statistical reality