Which is more important to you?

Seeking Truth for yourself and others
or
Seeking to make your views 'win'
?
yes it is politics because speech convinces people and people are politics

both are equally important.
Knowing why you are doing things makes you secure and invincible.
Winning is important because simply presenting the truth never works, everyone must work for the truth.
And so to make someone seek the truth you must first "win" them by strength and then make them work so that they open their eyes.

My views are the truth.

Truth.

In the past it was seeking truth. Now that I know the truth I want to make it win.

/thread

What is truth if no one cares about it?

That's the beauty of anonymity. A win means nothing. A loss means new knowledge. I write my opinion here and see how the sharks react. If the response is psychoanalytical or has niggerspeak, it means I'm probably right.

Seeking to make my views win. By itself, knowing the truth is absolutely futile. The truth only matters if it can be made to prevail.

The truth is that life and it's desire for self-preservation are inherently irrational. The truth is that I want to live and not die, therefore I will get as close as I can to immorality as possible. The truth is that as a member of the white race, I seek in the interests of the white-race and must exterminate all non-whites for lebensraum and to eliminate the dilution of my superior genes. Everyone wants their people to win, it's not a matter of views but of races. The truth is that the race war won't be much of a war, but mega-ultra-super holocaust of niggers, spics and semites (arabs and jews.) I'm a bit more concerned about how things will play out with the gooks and the curryniggers. Nevertheless the truth isn't terribly complicated as leftists will make it seem. Truth is that the sun will grow into a red sun and consume the earth in 5 billion years, we have that much time to square things out. Truth is painful. Truth is that none of us want to die. Truth is that we should work on cyrogenically freezing white people and hiding our dead kind in the artic for the time being.

No, it doesnt. It means someone couldn't think of a rational response. That doesn't mean there's no rational response.

second

That's why I said probably.

Preventing the opposite views from "winning".

This, everyone cares about lies anyway.

wrong faggot. If you don't believe in anything yet you fight "against" something you're exactly like them.
This leftist thinking will bring you the only truth it has, self destruction through assisted suicide.

I'm just stating what's most important.

As long as I don't have to live in multiculturalist communist hell, I'll be okay enough. I want to prevent that more than I want to make my dream world to come true.

So it doesn't matter that you keep the spirit of the monster alive after you slay it.

No, I'd rather live in a neutral world than throw away all of my passions and dedicate my life to fighting a political war.

you're missing the point.
This is war, that is why you don't prevent your enemies from winning. That is self destruction.
In war you must simply overcome the enemy and take advantage of every weakness he has. If you share the weakness of your opponent then the deciding factor is numbers and that means losing.
Get it now ?

False dichotomy. The truth is our greatest weapon; if we can make people realise the truth, we win.

Having the Truth prevail is important.
That's why it's important to not assume that your new or anonymous opponents will always be irrational just because most of your opponents were in the past.
Start using reason at first (being careful to not make them feel stupid) and if they show themselves to be irrational or to have differing priors then use more rhetoric.
Don't hesitate to use any dishonest tactics you can if needs be (and only then!). For the enemy will use these tactics too.

continued:
Also, don't forget to keep the borders of your mind open but with guards.
This means listening to the other side and seriously considering what they have to say.

(I don't know how much anyone here needs this advice but I'll post it just in case)

No. I view politics something like pic related.

The further you push towards the side you want to be, the harder it will be to stay there, and if you stop pushing it will definitely fall back down. It'll be a fight that never ends, whereas there is a natural stability towards the middle. As long as it doesn't go too far to the "wrong" side, I'm ok doing whatever I like doing in that society.

It's what you make of it.
OP was asking if to take the personal struggle or just accept the truth and move on to fight for it.
for this reason this guy:

explains tactics.
There are more schools of thought friend.
I prefer the anchor and the nuke approach.
My anchor is having a clear and SIMPLE idea of the truth while identifying every single propaganda piece that is against it.
The anchor is that I am free and any idea, any piece that takes my humanity away is good for destruction.
The nuke is the ability to keep up with everything your enemy is throwing at you and destroy every argument using as little words as possible.
This works even against multiple people, it has to be calm and especially with no form of aggression or anger. You listen, you nod, and the reply must make them feel nuked.

Returning to the idea of freedom: Kant is the faggot that permitted this modern destruction through his philosophy: By abstracting reason and criticizing it by perfection and then by reality he laid the foundation of the monster later called communism which aimed at creating a man to fit their view of the world.
Today we live in the same hell where the real is forced to fit the imagination.
This my friend is how to fight.

That is again incorrect. The old way no longer works in the new world.
See:

There's nothing wrong with trying to change reality to how it should be (that's basically what morality is).
What's bad however is not looking to reality for advice on how the changes should happen. I.e. trying to implement impossible ideals.

This

Define 'neutral'

How do you know the true morality ?

Kant is not at fault for kikes being kikes.

Seeking the truth, and then making sure those views prevail.

a worthless and pointless pursuit user

How do you?
You certainly believe that 'forcing the real to fit the imagination', communism and 'the modern destruction permitted by Kant's philosophy' are wrong.

Seeking truth for myselfs is the most important thing, since otherwise you have no idea what you're doing.

Seeking truths for others is a wasted effort, people follow actions, not words. Seek out the truth, and run with it.

Kant is the founder of man made morals.

Continuing on this note I think that >>>/polmeta/10252 is a good idea.

Weird, my IP changed. I'm OP i.e 47f34d btw

I'm guessing someone knocked over the router and disconnected it by accident.

Why not both?

The truth is the single most important thing in the world.

Ensuring it prevails is a calling anyone that is truly good.

How come?
I don't see why you'd have to do this. Can the white race really only survive if all others are exterminated?
Can't this be accomplished just through segregation or anti-miscegenation laws?

my views are the truth so, both

So, your dream world is one that isn't a multiculturalist communist hell?

“The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.”
― Socrates

What does this mean?
It obviously can't be literally true.

Also I do believe you're arguing from authority.

Seeking truth, that's why I'm pretty much a heretic.

this, OP. whilst the pursuit of truth is a noble goal, there is no such thing as absolute truth

Is it the absolute truth that there is no absolute truth?
It can't be yes because that would implie a contradiction and is therefore false.
If no then either its absolute falsehood or it's just a matter of opinion whether there's absolute truth or not. Which doesn't make sense, how can a thing be absolutely true for one and not another? That contradicts the definition of absolute truth.

It's one of those propagandized modern "intelligent" slogans. It's basically telling people that no matter how intelligent they are, they know nothing and therefore should conform to whatever the government says.

This is batshit female tier thinking. "Truth is whatever I decide it is". No, and nobody who ever thought that way ever did the world any good. Man's got to have a code.

Winning.
Not even a question.