Every egoist. Every fucking time

Every egoist. Every fucking time.

Other urls found in this thread:

pond5.com/stock-footage/000645243/north-america-space-night.html
youtube.com/watch?v=-kgZ9_AjODk
wallacelakelodge.com/bordercrossing.php
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

wow isnt this real fucking spooky

What cha ganen do about it queer dick.

Do you have the one where he says "I'm no ordinary leftist, I've read Stirner - welcome to my world"

...

wrong is a spook

at first the stirnerites are the edgiest, until they get too popular and the anti-stirnerites become edgy again, and then that becomes too popular and pro-stirner becomes edgy and–
it just keeps going and going. all of you are butthurt edgy marxists who cant argue

Oy vey

No

...

My entire existence has become a spook.

Feels bad man.

It was always a spook

You've only realized it now

Way to *not* read the book, faggot.

existence is a spook

to spook is to live

Can someone please explain to me why a nation is a spook?

kek

stirner would make a good gag manga.

Send me a nation by mail.

It is an ideal that require you sacrificing your own ego for it that you have no control over

In fact nationalism is the spook that Stirner focused on the most

What is a nation? Have you ever seen a nation? The only way a nation functions is that people believe it is real so it must be. On the other hand i exist no matter if i believe i exists or don't.

Be careful. If you say spook three times in a row they come and steal your eyes.

...

Don't worry my Aryan brother. I understand that reading is scary and degenerate. All the leftists do it so it must be evil.

If someone loved all of the people around them and loved the culture that came with it.

Would they still be sacrificing their own ego to give themselves up to the nation if it is what they loved the most?

Because a nation-state is not all the people around you and are not the ones that define your culture and costums.
They're a nation-state.
You have no obligation towards them, and to believe that you defend the people you love, by surrendering to an institution that merely lord over those same people is a pretty unreflected thing to do.

that sounds undialectical.

what if someone knows something is a spook (nation, cause of god, etc) but still subscribe and fight for it because it pleases their ego?

The big refutation to Stirner is basically a big SO WHAT.

Belief gives people power, without belief they are nothing.

Time to get on the helicopter.

I will show you the nation.

Class is a spook.

Spooks are spooks

No, you will show them ground, people, buildings, etc.

Time to get into the gulag.

I will show what labour is.

That form a nation.

Inb4 buikdings aren't buildings, they are just bricks.

Real labour has no wages?

Send me Communism by mail.

Well, buildings aren't buildings. There aren't spooks either, though. Neither is a "brick" a brick.

The key thing to understand is that while all spooks are concepts, not all concepts are spooks.

Well, nigger, words have no meaning according to your logic and spooks aren't spooks.

Nowhere do I even come close to insinuating that, you're making wild embellished interpretations because you can't understand what I'm saying and it makes you butthurt.

What is there to understand? Some concepts are spooks, some aren't, thus the concept of spook is a spook.

what

A (concept of spook) equals A (spook).

...

The concept is a spook is a spook, because you literally cannot point to me what a spook is.

I could but I don't want to type it out for like the sixth time for what will undoubtedly be a futile effort on my part. Just read Stirner if you don't get it, it's not a difficult read. Hell, just lurk more.

Until you show me a spook is, it ain't real, son.

This is like the equivalence of asking for God and get told to read the Bible.

Holy shit you stupid motherfucker.

No, it's like telling you to read a glossary to understand the word you don't know.

A spook is not real. It is a concept. However, it takes more than simply being conceptual to be "a spook." My god, this has all been said in this thread already, why would I waste my time trying to reason with you when you're so clearly preoccupied with being a smug dumbfuck than to read a fucking book.

Words have meaning now?

Funny that spooks are spooks but nations aren't nations and bricks aren't bricks.

Not really funny, just true. I'm glad you figured it out finally.

All I figures out is that I can show to you a nation and a brick, but you can never show to me a spook.

Oh wait niggers exist.

best joke I've seen today

...

Spooked beyond recognition.

How can memes be spooks when spooks are memes ?

...

The only reading you do is for honcho magazine

...

...

All your posts left me thinking…

Time to get on the helicopter.

send me a spook over mail

that's right spooks doesn't exist ergo stiner was wrong

checkmate stinerfags

Don't believe me?

Get on the helicopter, I will show you the nation alright.

give me a pic that all i ask for

...

I will give you a video even:
pond5.com/stock-footage/000645243/north-america-space-night.html

Wakarimasen.

Ghosts doesn't exist and that's the whole point of the term you fucking retard.

If they don't exist then we declare the term worthless.

Burgers everybody!

this

A country is a nation, yes.

inb4 countries are also spook

Not only are you spooked, but you're retarded too.

soo ? where is the nation ??
the lights ? or the main land ? or is the space behind the earth ? or do you mean the earth itself ?

locate the nation in this pic

I was trying to limit the scope to the USA, actually.

Didn't work out too well for you.

The nation is the people who live on that specific part of the Earth.

The light symbolizes that the people are there, living.

It's the same shit.

are mathematics spook?
are numbers spooks?

is 1+1 spooky?

...

Love is a spook, no?

You can't even get your spooks right, buddy.

but stinrfags told me that nothings is real and everything is spoopy

It can be, in certain contexts, yes.

No they are just people who live in some part of the earth

No the people are just people

This is who spooked you are you see lights and landmass as a nation you need to be despooked

kek

If I was caring on about the land only, I would just show you a picture of the Earth.

I specifically show the pictures of lights, because I want you to know that the nation is people living on a parcel of land.

And no, a country without people isn't a country.

No, that is precisely the opposite of what we're telling you.

Only you keep repeating that, in your unfathomable retardation.

retardation is spoopy

checkmate

The nation is the people who live in that certain parcel land of the Earth.

It's like a building is a structure made of various parts.

Funny I show you the nation and you still deny it.

Well, maybe if people stopped being so spooky every fucking time…

In what context is love not a spook?

Okay, I just want to say, congratulations. This was so fucking stupid I stopped halfway through what I was typing and gave up.

Or what?

love is an emotion.

spoopy

And? Emotion ain't real, bud.

Spooky.

The emotional attraction you feel is not a spook.

If you were to say, feel a need to "love" your family despite being abusive to you, you would be feeling motivated to behave against your best interests by the "idea of love" which would be a spook.

how*

So let me get this straight
nation = people who live on earth ?

Nationalism is a spook because it require you to sacrifice your ego to be real
sacriface your ego to be real
These are spooks like god nation family and justice

numbers ain't real too right?

So basically, you guys declare anything that force you guys to act against your self-interest a spook.

Then the idea of spook is destroyed because spook is real, m8.

you aren't even speaking english anymore you clown

Tell that to your psychologist.
Emotion is a natural phenomenon.

The nation is the people who live on that specific parcel of land, yes.

And nationalism doesn't require you to sacrifice anything, it's just an acknowledge that you were born in that nation.

Not really.

Spooky.

Nationatilism is caring about your well being and the people around you

this aint a spook buddy

...

Uh, yes, you are born in that nation.

You aren't rootless, thus you are nationalist.

Go re-read Stirner m8
It's the fixed idea of nature that Stirnerites have a problem with.

This the same as like arguing DNA is spook. It's also one of the reason that the cry of "read a book" on this board is a joke; those shouting it truly mean "books I like which substitute opinion, conjecture and occasionally outright error for cold, hard fact". Of course, pointing this out won't stop n1x and his worthless clique of Sargonesque demogogues being triggered and screaming "Holla Forums!" when faced with the truth.

kekkity kek

...

Does that not make you a nationalist. Please go read what nationalism is.

It's precisely a spook because you trust that fixed idea that it springs forth from nature in the first place.

...

listen don't even read
This is the book "The ego and his own " for free
youtube.com/watch?v=-kgZ9_AjODk

You are soo spooked you will never believe it

do math require the sacrifice of my ego to be realized in the world ?

What I said is nationalism.

Because if you never care about the place you are born, you can never be nationalism.

Yeah, nice strawman.

It does, because math follows a fixed idea.

You can do wrong calculation and get told wrong by other people using math. Your ego would have to be sacrificed since you have to follow the fixed idea of math.

spooky

and I don't have to do anything you tell me

you don't know me bro

you aint real

you spoopy

yes you have to think and reason to do a calculation

so you must stop your ego to do it

Thank you but I don't think I need to read a book to see what is clear as days.

k this is a b8 i should have none better

Where did I say I trust that it does?

Literal idpol

known *

The book follows a fixed idea no?

I see you've never done any anti-fash work, ever. You are a mouth without a brain.

I think internationalism fits the bill of "caring about […] the people around you" better.

Well, you are the one who said it's a natural phenomenon?

spoopoo

For example, people who take the concept of spook seriously.

How?

Internationalism is literally caring about everyone, no matter the nation.

nein

globalism doesn't have the tribal idea of close relationship in a community

it is harder to like someone that you never have seen

and this is spooky

I can see the Stirnerfags arguing with their moms

MOM YOU HAVE TO BUY ME THIS TOY

No, Stirner, we do not have money for it

NO MOM MONEY IS A SPOOK, MOM, AS AN EGOIST, THAT TOY IS A MY PROPERTY ALREADY

Then reality strikes, the money spook hits back and Stirner boy got no toy.

We're talking about borders here. Imaginary lines.
Drop the pretense of a concept's knowledge and actually have an argument next time.

They are as not imaginary since they are physical borders.

ie everyone around you

No.

To be fair, a properly egoist child would simply steal the toy.

I cannot possibly care for everyone around me.

it is

sorry to break your spooky dictionary

youre holding onto some spook term here

Then Stirner isn't a properly egoist since he still has to work to get money.

Everything is not spooks. Everything is language and symbol, for which the concept of spook is a part of and didn't account for. Why is it so hard to understand?

But that being said, really, Stirner was far ahead of his time with ideas like this.

Okay, then show me the landmark, the physical manifestations, that corresponds to this line and separate nation from naton.

it's okay honey you've got the other threads down pat

Reality is not vidya, you don't have a physical, invisible wall delimiting territories.

wallacelakelodge.com/bordercrossing.php

Nigger what, that is what border is for.

People used to build walls for that shit.

How does it feel to know that every historian, theorist, and academic of any substance disagrees with you?

Okay. I'm going to strike you about the skull with this cricket bat. Call it a pillow and I'm sure my beating you will not hurt.

However, I'm fairly sure you're a fucking idiot and smacking you in the back of the head until your retinas detach would be a service to humanity.

spookintown

have you ever seen a pic of that border? i think not

and do you think those border simple popped out magically with no foundation in reality whatsoever?

not yet :^)

I said it can be a natural phenomenon.
I never said I trust that it is.
That implies infatuation with what is natural.
For instance, I can probably arouse emotions using drugs if I chose too.
Either way, there is a reaction taking place.
One just happens to be spontaneous.

Pretty spooky.

Feel normal since it's various other historians, theorists and academics also disagree with them.

So real, physical barriers are spooky now.

You can actually go and touch them.

lol
ok because they are believing spooks as so do you :^)

lol you don't think?
I've actually been to that border.

No, they popped up to defend spooks.

Yes, because borders doesn't exist in themselves you need an authority to materialize them.

dont you know that physical trees mark it and divide it?

what spook?

Of course you can.
You don't get what I mean by post-facto nor man-made apparently.

Nothing exists in themselves.

You always need an authority to materialize shit.

And shitposters too apparently.

So man-made things don't count now.

Wow.

just like consciousness

spoolky

didnt you know? babies are sppoks

You don't get what I mean by […] man-made apparently.

We'll reach the shitposting singularity soon…

Let's test that hypothesis using a tree branch and the back of your skull…

much sppokk

not an argument

No I'm trying to debate the more likely possibility that "spooks" are a sort of proto form for the concept of semiotics and linguistics as we understand and use them today.

But if everything is about "attention" to you, I shouldn't bother arguing. You're right.

For example, the Bible is man-made.

Trees exist because the Earth and various earth creatures fucking allows them to exist.

This thread is quickly approaching 200+ replies

and the whole issue would be solved if everyone here went and read like, the first ten pages of Ego and His Own.

Ten fucking pages.

where do you store all that sppok m8?

Wow, is that a threat?

Who moves that tree branch btw?

It's a garbage ideology, m8.

You have Stinerists go on saying the physical, man-made walls are literally spooky.

Well, Stirner can go and deny reality.

Where do you store all that shitposting?

spooky

Hello, are you here to make Sargon of Akkad look accomplished? You're doing a good job.

The point

You

Ok this thread is iredeemable, so no more restrain in asking stupid shit:
Is Sanic Chris-chan's spook?

just going to post it. If you want to go out of your way to avoid it, there' nothing I can do.
——

All Things Are Nothing To Me
What is not supposed to be my concern!2 First and foremost, the Good Cause,3
then God’s cause, the cause of
mankind, of truth, of freedom, of humanity, of justice; further, the cause of my people, my prince, my fatherland;
finally, even the cause of Mind, and a thousand other causes. Only my cause is never to be my concern. "Shame on
the egoist who thinks only of himself!"
Let us look and see, then, how they manage their concerns – they for whose cause we are to labor, devote
ourselves, and grow enthusiastic.
You have much profound information to give about God, and have for thousands of years "searched the depths
of the Godhead," and looked into its heart, so that you can doubtless tell us how God himself attends to "God’s
cause," which we are called to serve. And you do not conceal the Lord’s doings, either. Now, what is his cause?
Has he, as is demanded of us, made an alien cause, the cause of truth or love, his own? You are shocked by this
misunderstanding, and you instruct us that God’s cause is indeed the cause of truth and love, but that this cause
cannot be called alien to him, because God is himself truth and love; you are shocked by the assumption that God
could be like us poor worms in furthering an alien cause as his own. "Should God take up the cause of truth if he
were not himself truth?" He cares only for his cause, but, because he is all in all, therefore all is his cause! But we,
we are not all in all, and our cause is altogether little and contemptible; therefore we must "serve a higher cause."
– Now it is clear, God cares only for what is his, busies himself only with himself, thinks only of himself, and has
only himself before his eyes; woe to all that is not well-pleasing to him. He serves no higher person, and satisfies
only himself. His cause is – a purely egoistic cause.
How is it with mankind, whose cause we are to make our own? Is its cause that of another, and does mankind
serve a higher cause? No, mankind looks only at itself, mankind will promote the interests of mankind only,
mankind is its own cause. That it may develop, it causes nations and individuals to wear themselves out in its
service, and, when they have accomplished what mankind needs, it throws them on the dung-heap of history in
gratitude. Is not mankind’s cause – a purely egoistic cause?
I have no need to take up each thing that wants to throw its cause on us and show that it is occupied only with
itself, not with us, only with its good, not with ours. Look at the rest for yourselves. Do truth, freedom, humanity,
justice, desire anything else than that you grow enthusiastic and serve them?
They all have an admirable time of it when they receive zealous homage. Just observe the nation that is defended
by devoted patriots. The patriots fall in bloody battle or in the fight with hunger and want; what does the nation
care for that? By the manure of their corpses the nation comes to "its bloom"! The individuals have died "for the
great cause of the nation," and the nation sends some words of thanks after them and – has the profit of it. I call that
a paying kind of egoism

nice spok

Your argument was not a refutation of the concept of semiotics.

The Bible is man-made too. And so is every theological text that disagrees with it, like the Quran.

The whole point of Stirner is that morality isn't real. It's just a reformulation of the is/ought gap.

But only look at that Sultan who cares so lovingly for his people. Is he not pure unselfishness itself, and does
he not hourly sacrifice himself for his people? Oh, yes, for "his people." Just try it; show yourself not as his, but as
your own; for breaking away from his egoism you will take a trip to jail. The Sultan has set his cause on nothingbut himself; he is to himself all in all, he is to himself the only one, and tolerates nobody who would dare not to be
one of "his people."
And will you not learn by these brilliant examples that the egoist gets on best? I for my part take a lesson from
them, and propose, instead of further unselfishly serving those great egoists, rather to be the egoist myself.
God and mankind have concerned themselves for nothing, for nothing but themselves. Let me then likewise
concern myself for myself, who am equally with God the nothing of all others, who am my all, who am the only
one.4
If God, if mankind, as you affirm, have substance enough in themselves to be all in all to themselves, then I feel
that I shall still less lack that, and that I shall have no complaint to make of my "emptiness." I am not nothing in the
sense of emptiness, but I am the creative nothing, the nothing out of which I myself as creator create everything.
Away, then, with every concern that is not altogether my concern! You think at least the "good cause" must be
my concern? What’s good, what’s bad? Why, I myself am my concern, and I am neither good nor bad. Neither has
meaning for me.
The divine is God’s concern; the human, man’s. My concern is neither the divine nor the human, not the true,
good, just, free, etc., but solely what is mine, and it is not a general one, but is – unique,5
as I am unique.
Nothing is more to me than myself!

It's me who made the fucking point.

Without the authority (of the physical laws of Earth), trees wouldn't fucking exist.

That is its own sort of morality, no?

k

no

...

Sound spooky to me.

Why does yourself matter than other people?

ITT, we debunk Stirner once and for all.

That's all you read, isn't it.

Why do other people matter if you have no self?

but you haven't.
All that's happening is shitposting

That's the conclusion and all I need to fucking know.

Stirner is spooky.

...

Yes. The morality of denying morality. To accept morality would be immoral.

These things are contradictory.

Stirner follows the fixed idea yet denounces everyone of doing the same.

yes

its sppook itself to existing by following the spooks of some dude years ago

they dont

but apparently they do too but only when debunking nationalism

oh my fucking god

There's a reason they are called the PHYSICAL LAWS.

They are authority, they are the rules that all men follow.

fixed idea of what?

Of the individual mattering more than God, nation and other people.

The assertion was that everything is semiotics. Fuck off now.

which is why that's never said.

The point isn't to "deny" morality, but to recognize it as stemming from your ego, your self interest, and thus being completely subjective and founded in your own wants.

When you can't argue, you make fun of the opponent.

Where did he say that?

What is its own morality?
What i mean is that Stirner doesn't say for example that the nation is a spook, but rather that the idea that there would be a moral obligation to be loyal to the nation is a spook. There is no such obligation, unless it is imposed by someone. There are no moral obligations whatsoever.

...

That's a denial of morality because you know full well morality isn't stemmed with the well-being of your truly.

Morality concerns for the good of society.

Your morality is just self-interest.

Argue WHAT EXACTLY?

You just said, straight up, "I don't give a fuck lalalala I can't hear you"

...

...

That's the spook. Right there.

spooks

stirner rejects metaphysics by inventing his own subjective ontology while rejecting others subjective ontology

is all spooks from top to bottom

The argument is that Stirner is in fact spooky when he concerns with himself more than other people.

Well, that is the basic of morality.

You might as well call morality a spook.

I'm still not seeing where he said "the individual matters more than God, nation and other people."

spooky

YES

EXACTLY

WELL DONE MATE

These are arguments?

Do you deny physical laws now?

I wasn't moving goal posts. Do you know what semiotics and linguistics mean? That's what I said. You made some bullshit analogy I didn't care to read at all.

Next time, try not to work argument into analogy.

I'd say that's outdated. The idea of "ego", existing this concretely is dubious.

We are motivated by a multitude of factors, both our own, not our own, and our want to be more than our own, among many many others.

I find if you replace "spooks" with language and symbol, you'll find a much more cohesive and interesting piece of work. Which is more of a compliment to Stirner than a detraction. What holds it down however, is the outdated 19th century conception of what ego is.

when did he say that?

...

So morality is a spook.

Well, feel free to do whatever you want, then get killed by the spook you so hate.

Is subjective concern the same thing as something that objectively matters?

spock

Yes, considering he never gives a shit about anything else.

The desire to act is entirely our own. For example, if I wish to please someone or fulfill their desires, it is still about what I want. You cannot remove the subject that observes reality from the equation. At the root, it is always about the fulfillment of one's self.

I'm not sure what you mean by replace with language and symbol but for now I'm going to assume it's a flawed comparison, seeing as you so blatantly misunderstand what the ego is in regards to Stirner's work.

Liar, like every feminist ever.

When did I say that?

THE EGO IS A SPOOK
YOU CAN'T SEND YOUR EGO IN THE MAIL
==HAHAHAHAHAHA CHECKEMATE MAN I AM VERY GOOD PHOKHLOHPHER IHIAHAHAKLAA A
==
HAHAHA KILLMEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA I WANTTODIE ENDMY LIFE

spock

Morality can't kill you. Other people will kill you, in pursuing their own unique self interests.

Not fucking always.

You see a hot bitch, you want to fuck her, but you know society will get you jailed for it.

Thus you get afraid of spook and don't actually act in one self-interest.

so is good if i hit you with a bat as long as i enjoy it?

nice

Other people kill you precisely because you don't follow their games/their codes of morality.

They all sacrifice a part of their egos in order to coexist in a society, there's nothing unique about this.

You're confusing natural phenomenons with social constructs. You're putting on the same level gravity and smoking ban. There is an intent in authority, not in the fucking physicals laws.

SPOOK YOU CAN'T SEND A TRIGGERED IN A MAIL
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
HHHHHHHHHHH
CHECKMATE HAHAHAHA DEAD YOU SPOK

Then kill yourself.

It's in your self-interest, because as long as you live, you must live for others.

Well it's not "immoral" in the same way it's not a sin.

It would be in fulfillment of your ego, but it would be up to you to judge whether that action is in your best interests, as it is not in mine and I would therefore seek to stop you.

There is no "good" or "bad."

now with out shitposting this is a spook not a spok

HHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Spok SPOK HHAHAHQA YOU CAN'T SEND ME LIVE IN A MAIL NOW FUCK OFF YOU SPOOKED SPOK

because something is a contruction doesn't mean it doesnt exist or that it isnt based in reality

a house is a constructions but it has its purpose and its very real

enjoy that bat hit

spooked

The ego is me. I can knock to your door. Checkmate.

Gravity is the ban of Earth imposed on its earthlings.

I do not confuse shit, because Earth is an authority, even without conscience.

Your desire is the Other's desire. It is not something inherent that is born magically within you. If it was, one would have to give in to the 'yuman nashor' argument

thanks for ignoring the rest of my post I guess

HAHAHAHA
DOORS ARE SPOOKS YOU CAN'T SEND THEM IN MAIL HAHAHAH

YOU SPOKED DIE DIE DIE
OH WAIT YOU CAN'T DIE DEATH IS A SPOK
HAHAHAHAH

You are just a brain in a skeleton.

You are not an ego.

Two words: Creative Nothing.

I don't need to read your entire spook post

That's a spook

I am my own ego

that distinction is a spoop

Let's suppose he doesn't give a shit about anything else. Where does it follow that it is also the objectively the only thing that matters?

last shitpost
it is in my ego self interest to keep away from this bait pool

...

Keep your spook out of Stirnir threads, m8.

See>>810535

So you don't have a point then?

I'd in fact argue, desire is not our own. Desire is what we want to be as, compared to the whole, even in its most independent. Desire for self improvement is desire for self improvement for other purposes. You can't divorce desire from its collective meaning, its context.

The Ego and its Own is Our Ego and its Loneliness.

I know I'm somewhat bastardizing Stirner here, and doing a piss poor job at that; but I just find it underwhelming that there isn't more expansion about ideas Stirner left, and seeing criticism of it as insult rather than healthy debate.

I mean that language is what influences us. What ideas are between words influences us. Communication, influences us. Spooks themselves are not the problem, and outdated as the concept is, you could say that spooks are a symptom of the systemic problem within human communication.

For example, Stirner argues we should reject influence by ideals, ideas, morals, what have you. I find it odd we shift discourse away from Stirner as if insulting this is rejection of common knowledge. We are built to defend what we believe, which in a way, Stirner warned about. But so ever ironically, we're doing it with Stirner himself.

Which is a shitty analogy, I'm kind of tired.

What I'm saying here is, behind everything you call a spook, religion, morals, appeals to human nature, arguments, everything, it is not the fact we ourselves are easily spooked; it is the fact we are spooked by something ever greater, and that is the fact we are limited in communication to come up with an alternative, forcing us to repeat the limited amount of options we have going forward with ideas such as spook without their own specificity.

I wasn't.
You currently are tho

You made my day lad

Your next post will be 'Read Stirner/Le Ego and Le Own'

about what

How is that relevant?

Gravity is just as real as any man-made walls.

wtf happened to this thread

raed

He states that nothing matters except himself.

while rejecting others subjectivism

spooks

spooks

spooks

I never thought I would use this in Holla Forums

Nationalism.

a fucking awful joke that inspires Tribalism and Hatred.

A non-guarded border is like an invisible wall, good thing walls are actually built and borders are actually guarded.

Because it's a fucking objective statement?

It is exactly that, you acknowledge that you are born there.

We tumblr now.

...

Chile turned out fine, unlike Venezula.

Is mind a spook?

After Chile elected a left wing party or decades :^)

...

no, im from chile and the "chilean miracle" is just fascist propaganda.

the development in my country actually started after we came back to democracy.

also, the economical crisis during the popular government was due to the USA complot against allende's regime.
actually, chile could easily growth it's economy during the communist government due to the many effort's allende made (synco project, agricultural reform, copper nacionalization)

Physics are a spook since time and distance are arbitrary measurements.

Not really. I'm from Chile and Pinochet literally sold our country piece by piece to foreign companies.

All he did was contribute to neoliberalism. He was an American experiment/puppet, after all.

Our "left wing" parties are only left wing in name, because in reality both major side are full of fucking porkies.

Your post is spooky

No it's the word of God asshole

Implying hatred is wrong

Dropped

A nation is the area in which a group of people decide their laws will be enforced. A nation is where if somebody who enters into it that the people who apply their laws to the area don't want around they can send him out.