Explaining Postmodernism

If that is true he is really careful with his power level. However I think he is quite confused himself, and needs just a little push in the right direction from someone else who is just as good at articulating their thoughts in such intellectual depth as Jordan Peterson is

Any philosophy fags around? Understand objectivity and subjectivity first before delving into topics such as post modernism

THAT BEING SAID. his advice in the simple and practical terms are incredibly solid. He posted a recent lecture on how growing up and being useful to society is itself the counterculture today! Very goof stuff

good*

checked

Well, ideologies have a single answer to everything but reality is more complicated than that. For communists the problem that needs to be solved in the world is the difference between proletariat and bourgeoisie. Their whole world is about that only. For Black Lives Matter folk everything is about skin color. For anarchocapitalists everything is about the size of the state. For Holla Forumslacks everything is about the jews, you see what I mean?

Also, I know many of us, myself included, start caring about politics as a way to cope with our failure in life. Some of us have a shitty life and cares too fucking much about politics before sorting our own life out, like finding a steady job, being independent etc. And that's not so different from those SJWs that show up on Peterson's talks.

I think he does that to communists and nazists as well. It's his way of recognizing that there's not much difference between him and those who shot people on the back of the head. It's how one recognizes his shadow. Doesn't mean he agrees with it, though.

bump

You pretty much nailed the mechanism that keeps post-modernists from being able to connect the constituent elements of their muddy frame of reference into something resembling logos. They want to avoid some little dragon, so instead they invent this massive fantasy dragon, they speculate on it's structures, and make lots of detailed plans about how to disrupt those structures. How in the bloody hell is someone who can't manage to groom themselves properly going to disrupt this megalithic structure of power and privilege?

I'm nearly sure post-modernism is a fear and reaction to the power and responsibility of the written word.

Also, I can't help but be reminded of this far off Campbell lecture…he was describing a kind of rite of passage with masks where the young initiate gets to be briefly possessed by the spirit of the mask. If we consider the conceptual domain at work here to be only the ritual it could be stated, potentially, that the initiate gets to feel the power of logos for the first time. Which is really important to do. I think that most people will fear logos the first time they encounter it. If they aren't guided well as to what the fuck just happened and/or if a person hasn't much personal grit, they'll get triggered by 'hatefacts' and run straight into the warm brackets of some intellectual cattle chute.

I read this crap years ago and its garbage. Jordan Peterson promoting this and you eating it up shows just how gay and basic you are.

You should be reading this instead.
jacobinmag.com/2017/03/jason-reza-jorjani-stony-brook-alt-right-arktos-continental-philosophy-modernity-enlightenment/

tl;dr post-modernism is more of a tradition of the right and will probably be a better vehicle for us the right to succeed.

Get the fuck out of here with this logos bullshit E. Michael Jones. No one gives a fuck and you sound like a pretentious faggot.
Post-modernism deconstructs the status-quo. The status-quo that the West has lived under for centuries has been the Enlightenment equality bullshit. The right will deconstruct all of this shit in whatever way possible "yes women are equal but I don't care", "yes we are all human but I don't care" are post-modern statements from the right and are a bigger and better push forward than some objectivist christfag bullshit.

tl;dr it us liberalism, dialecticalism, Judaism.
"If it doesn't kill you, then it should make you stronger."
So, why are you upset at all that I'm slowly cutting off your flesh? I will not be killing you. I want you to survive. If you can't beat me with your hands tied behind your back, you're not fighting fairly.

Literalism/pedantism takes the quote as gospel instead of as metaphorical or suggestive. That is, it must survive all possible objections to it. A method of sophistry is to extreme-man the positions of your dialectical enemy so that they appear weaker to people easily seduced by simple arguments.

When a man says he wants to fight someone who insults him and proclaims himself strong, the conceited weaker one says "If you are so strong, why do you not fight me with your hands behind your back? Are you weak?" The trick here is that there is no evaluative standard introduced, so they rely on a 'pure' form of strength. That is, because the comparator is null, the person who is hearing the statement must fill it in themselves. The result is that they fill it with the negation of absence and/or complete inferiority (perhaps inferiority inserted because they imagine that is what the professor (one who is professing) is trying to imply) with its opposite: max. superiority and/or quantitative existence (translated into max. superiority). That is, strength as a binary attribute instead of a qualitative scale, converted into something more relatable: qualia.

It is a sort of quantitative and atomistic thinking, requiring the black/white distinction like that between matter and void. Qualitative thinking necessarily accounts for both. Those who take qualitative thinking atomistically, will say that there must exist some heavenly father outside the qualitative realm which preserves the quantitative metaphysical framework.

"For Holla Forumslacks everything is about the jews, you see what I mean?"
When we are online and on this board.
Only time i think about kikes outside of when browsing Holla Forums is when something degenerate is forced into my face (example: seeing a hexagram on an ad with a multiracial couple. If i see a multiracial couple i just think that one of them is fucked in the head) or when i am thinking about politics because jews and politics today are almost the same thing once you have been red pilled

There he goes again

I prefer to defend Truth as a concept than to enter once more in the mud of postmodernism. I feel like using those tools will create a monster in itself. I don't know, though. You may be right but I don't want to participate in that.

You went deep there but I can't follow you. lol

It's absolutely the pathway that we must take. Heidegger was a post-modernist. Foucault - although French and a homosexual - was called a Nazi in the 60s for his rejection of assigning normalizing qualities to power relations.

If we invert the very understanding of Hegel that Marx had (focusing on material conditions rather than Weltgeist), then we more or less can push a deconstruction of all subsequent Marxist thought. All of the bases of Marxism are founded upon this silt, and it can be easily dealt with if you focus on that first.

Well, I know, let's say, "orthodox" marxists don't like this post-modern bullshit either for reasons unknown to me because I'm not versed into philosophy. But won't we be deconstructing classic marxism and postmodern identity politics and other stuff like that remain?

To be honest I like Peterson's teaching of telling the articulated truth or the Logos because it resonates with me and I'm thinking of my own well-being as well so I want to stray as far as possible from postmodernism as I can. Telling truth seems to have an effect on the network of people we're connected to and it makes ripples just like a meme does. I also believe culture change starts in the individual and grows from him.

I'd really like to point out that as much as I hate E-celebs. Jordan Peterson is a clinical psychologist first and formost. Proceeding that, a professor, a logos warrior and lastly he films stuff for youtube. Hardly close to any alt-kiker who makes their shekels purely from youtube. I'm getting real sick and tired of kike mods shutting down any self-improvement threads or anything relating to philosophy, literature, psychology or art. Holla Forums starts to feel like /newsplus/ without the crabposting. /polmeta/ is a fucking joke. This needs to be addressed.

:'^)

For one thing, Peterson is against nazism, communism and ideologies in general, so I guess some around here wouldn't like him for that.

The man is an inspiration to me, though.

What are these called? Double dubs and a trips?

I can't even begin how much this man changed my life. It was a great unintentional parallel reading Dostoevsky and discovering him at the same time.
Something so simple as speaking the truth and aiming for high goals can change your life dramatically.
AND THAT'S NO JOKE

Bucko up, buckoroo.
I found a quote that kinda sums up Peterson's position on truth. It's "Athanasius against the World". Look it up.
He knows about the estrogen pill.

Source for the quote on the left, please?

What weirds me out about it is how people react to it. You speak the truth and of states of consciousness and conscientiousness, some think you have gone mad, completely bonkers. Some think you are some kind of messiah and either want to crucify you or laud you. And some are just like, "yeah I know!"

Synagogue of Satan still exist though. Which is the problem, and the cause for young men turning right, or turning into various states of female.

I can't help but think of Peterson as some lower kind of prophet. Prophet being someone that announces the coming of the Truth or speaks Truth himself.

Yeah that doesn't bode well for him and he knows it. He looks quite frightened at times.

First off, I wouldn't write off post-modernism as "bullshit," as it inherently admits the Hegelian absolute as preexisting (you can view the absolute as the logos, as for Hegel, he more or less viewed it as his understanding of the divine). As a reaction to modernism, it works to negate the contradictions within modernism in order to synthesize an understanding closer to the absolute.

This point I absolutely agree with. Post-modernism as an entire discipline deconstructs the whole of post-Enlightenment philosophy. We can even operationalize Gramsci to serve our interests by deconstructing the Marxist foundational conceptions there within.

Negation is our friend.

There's a movement in Brazil that aims in "occupying spaces" much in the same way I guess Gramsci proposed (I never read him).

Doesn't post-modernism deconstructs pre-enlightenment philosophy, though?

How, exactly?

Forget to say that this movement is mainly catholic conservative tho. They (well, I'm kind of included in it) value mostly pre-enlightenment thinking, including Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas and so on.

youtu.be/7EZ9Vgsp3OE
Someone had to introduce the concept or this discussion would devolve into 'muh atheistic phenomenological prespective wearing the mask of reason' because that's the poison pill of post-modernism.

I know, right? It's like he speaks directly from the heart and when he says something that is emotional to him it shows.

Are there any decent books that encapsulate Jordan Petersons fundamental views and ideas. Everytime I put on his lectures I end up getting lost and bogged down in some of the tangents he goes off on. Should I just read Jung instead?

Around1:39:27 starts the good part.

Maybe his book Maps of Meaning clarifies it. I haven't read it.

>Pause and write down IN YOUR OWN WORDS what you interpret from everything from one sentence, to a topic and far as the whole interview or lecture.

You can dissect so much information from one sentence, he really is on par with Nietzsche.
I bought a whole fresh notebook just for the series of lectures he is doing right now on the bible and a separate notebook just for the dozens of other interviews and lectures I watched.
Simple, but very effective.

Without going into too much detail. Inform those close to you that from now on you will be speaking in complete truths, and ask them to do the same. Assuming that the spoken truth will lead you to the best possible outcome in your lives. You will see results.

PAY ATTENTION
SPEAK THE TRUTH

This vulnerability describes a sort of memetic allergy to Weltgeist, and if you pretend to be a newbie marxist with knowledge of Hegel, you're pointed down a kind of 'deprogramming' path before your 'criticism' can be 'accepted'. The smart ones will panic, the dumb ones will be confused, Maoists go full retard. Discussing Weltgeist in non-socialist terms got me banned from several commie chatz…It's a spicy meme.

I guess this is because the marxian holds that there is no spirit but the revolution. You cannot even describe it as a spirit, because there is no spirit, such talk is reactionary! GULAG 4 U! The revolution is a material agenda laid out in the full corpus of socialist writings, totally not mystical, it's there if you're smart enough to read. So you have the majesty of Weltgeist basically compacted into this constantly accreting and self-referential stack of reasons smashing the patriarchy is way more important than cleaning your room.

Alinsky compacted and weaponized a deconstruction process which is catalyzed by the cognitive dissonance caused by post-modern perspectives. Post-modern reasoning is the glue that binds the socialist's impossible coalition. All you have to do is dissolve the glue and sort out the pieces.

There's something representative of the Logos in this.

Logos is the new TRS-tier LARP word like Deus Vult and Fashy. Kill yourselves, retards.

...

Well, it seems to me those terms represent the evolution of anti-postmodernist and anti-left thinking that's been happening on the Internet in the last few years. I wish someone could track what was the spirit, the terms and the memes used in Holla Forums, manosphere, neoreaction and other similar circles along the years.

Nice "argument".

The feeling Peterson talks about of togetherness when you speak something true is really there. You can feel it in your chest and in your hands. Integration.

Some years ago I lost a friend over speaking the truth. I asked his girlfriend if she was single and when she asked me why I told her "because I'm attracted to you". She ends up telling the dude and a friendship was ended, but, in a sense, that brought me here. One needs to have outcome independence, as you said.

I never understood this philosophy shit. Makes no sense. That's why I went into engineering

Autism this intense is astonishing. You should end your life, it's the eugenic thing to do.

Well, STEM certainly has its value but its ideas that change the world. We're suffering because of an idea, basically.

Nah, I'm too stubborn for that.

You asked the girlfriend of your friend whether she is single?
That's about as dumb as asking your father whether he has children.

lol i know. But at the time I didn't know if they were dating actually and college relationships don't tend to last much, so I asked.

Most of it is just intellectual masturbation. At best it describes the world, but does not drive it. It does not drive the world because it's incomprehensible to probably 95% of the population, and only a small fraction of that remaining 5% ever bother to read into it anyway. Such inaccessible theories necessarily have little meaningful impact on the powerful tides and currents of society. Even the men who claim or think to lead rarely concern themselves with such esoteric theory, and when they do it's still more than mental masturbation. In the end they can only implement their ideas if they're moving with the current. Their philosophy does not determine the direction of the current; the direction of the current determines whether or not their philosophy will appear relevant.

When reading philosophy, always remember the example of Diogenes the Cynic set when confronting the Zeno-fags. After hearing a long lecture about why motion is impossible, Diogenes stood up and walked around. It's a curious trait of humans, that we can construct exceedingly elaborate systems of thought that conflict with the trivially observable, and lose ourselves in them. The reasoning of the Zeno-fags was detailed and people took them seriously; the human capacity for self-delusion should never be underestimated. Today in universities they'll use calculus to explain why Zeno was wrong. But why should anybody waste their time with rigorous mathematical refutations? Diogenes had it right.

You claim the guy was your friend, but you didn't know if he had a girlfriend? Incredible autism. Reminder that anti-eugenics is anti-white.

> still little more than

Could you be any more jewish?
Being a fascist means accepting the natural order of the world. It striving for perfection knowing you will never be perfect.
Holla Forums's only issue is not the jews. To us the problem is skind color, the size of the state, the bourgeoisie and most importantly the jew who makes all of these things an issue in the first place. They are still problems.
Just because you've killed the jew pulling the trigger doesn't mean the bullet his gun fired is going to stop mid air.

obligatory

Even though it's nowadays considered to be "the" solution to Zeno's paradox that calculus refutation of Zeno isn't really a refutation. Zeno made a simple logic error, that's all.

I once wrote this little refutation of it:
"Zeno's paradox of Achilles and the tortoise isn't actually a logical paradox. Furthermore it has not so much to do with infinite sums and the standard solution of Zeno's paradox of defining an infinite sum as a sequence of partial sums that converges is unsatisfying, because it is just a definition. Rather the resolution of the paradox consists of noticing that Zeno implicitly uses relativized quantifiers (quantifying only over those points the tortoise reaches before it is overtaken by Achilles) in the description of the race between Achilles and tortoise, which is only at odds with what our experience tells us , i.e. that Achilles overtakes the tortoise nevertheless, if they are mistaken for absolute quantifiers (quantifying over all poins). If we make this explicit, then Zeno's paradox actually becomes a tautology:
"At every point where the tortoise is still in front of Achilles, the tortoise is still in front of Achilles"
or
"Whenver Achilles hasn't overtaken the tortoise yet, Achilles hasn't overtaken the tortoise yet".
But from this tautology it of course doesn't follow that there is no point at which the tortoise is not in front of Achilles anymore.

Zeno's paradox:
"The [second] argument was called “Achilles,” accordingly, from the fact that Achilles was taken [as a character] in it, and the argument says that it is impossible for him to overtake the tortoise when pursuing it. For in fact it is necessary that what is to overtake [something], before overtaking [it], first reach the limit from which what is fleeing set forth. In [the time in] which what is pursuing arrives at this, what is fleeing will advance a certain interval, even if it is less than that which what is pursuing advanced … . And in the time again in which what is pursuing will traverse this [interval] which what is fleeing advanced, in this time again what is fleeing will traverse some amount … . And thus in every time in which what is pursuing will traverse the [interval] which what is fleeing, being slower, has already advanced, what is fleeing will also advance some amount. (Simplicius(b) On Aristotle's Physics, 1014.10)"

You can only deconstruct until you reach the absolute, meaning you can negate the initial Marxian negation.

Absolutely my point. Hegel was never meant for the left, and they completely bastardized his understanding of the absolute and of the material. The Hegelian dialectic isn't tied to the material, and it can be completely esoteric in nature, which allows it to truly exist.

The Marxian understanding doesn't even allow for the object to possess its own Dasein by presupposing the Weltgeist of historically teleological egalitarian revolution.

Simply put, it's heresy.

Also, I think that you can invert the whole ideation of Cultural Hegemony and repurpose it for the right - Gramsci himself admitted that the revolution was not imminent, and the masses would reproduce the ideology of those who control the culture.

152 words too many, Zeno does not deserve such effort. You should learn from Diogenes.

Well, he was more like a college friend and I didn't have a conversation with him between one semester and the other and that's when I asked her. I truly had no idea.

Don't you think Diogenes was right because you are cynical yourself? I think it was through this intellectual masturbation that Plato's and Aristotle's philosophy appeared and it influenced the whole not yet created Western Civilization.

Way to much over thinking. Nothing you said makes any sense at all.
This is Holla Forums in a hand shell. Next your going to call me retarded because I refuse to play your game of mental gymnastics.

If you have any doubt that Diogenes was right, throw yourself off a tall building. You'll never hit the ground.

What is the initial Marxian negation? As I said, I'm a pleb in this.

Dude, the power of the State in a nazi/fascist/socialist regime is immense.

hat people think peasant farmers where running around reading Plato across the land.
They based their ideas off of western civilization, not the other way around.

And this contradicts anything I said how?
I said size of the state is a problem, i never said if the problem was that it was too big or too small.

So we do this? Even just the pre-Constantine measure would work, but it's a good plan for setting the post-modernists straight.
home.apu.edu/~jwinston/Arianism.pdf

*I love that

I think people were influenced by him regardless if they read him or not. If not the serfs and the nobles, at least the priests read him and they were some sort of cultural guides. People can be influenced by ideas through other people and systems.

Why do people even follow postmodernism?
It all reduces the world down to subjective wishy-washyness.
You'll never see any true intellectuals such as scientists engaging in such meaningless abstracts.

Precisely right. Successful philosophy is a codification of the context in which it succeeds. Western civilization isn't owed to Plato and Aristotle. The remembrance of Plato and Aristotle is owed to the success of western civilization.

Still, those people are out there protesting and influencing the media and when you influence the media you have some kind of power.

If reality can be bent to your will how can you not be attracted by it?

What do you think?

Intricate esoteric ideas that can only be comprehended by a very small portion of the population have very little influence. Ideas can influence society, but the ideas that do that influencing are short and simple. Short and simple enough to be understood and readily spread through the general masses.

I'm half-white.

Rid the world of yourself, subhuman.

Post-modernists are trying to bargain with reality to avoid the idea that they may be capable of evil. Usually all the way into outright being evil and making up elaborate (occult) excuses for it.

...

I think those short and simple ideas are derivatives of bigger ideas derived from philosophy. It's a filter-down process. There's a philosophy of Masonry and it influenced the whole world for centuries. Same thing for the Pre-socratics, Plato, Aristotle and Aquinas.

Thats not at all how Greek society worked.
Claiming plato is the founder of western society is autism at its finest that apparently a lot of people believe.
However it is the other way around.

no u :^)

I didn't mean Greek society but medieval society influenced by his ideas centuries later.

You know what, I think that is the single best way I've ever heard to describe them.
Shit, I'll be carrying that for awhile.

Also I don't think he was The Founder but part of its foundation.

I think given the state is fascist it should be large.

Thats where you're wrong kid.
source: Holla Forums 2016.

No, those "big ideas", wherever they have any semblance or relationship to simpler ideas, are needlessly complex systems of thought created to stroke the egos of their creators. Mental masturbation. They get off on producing something intricate, even though it serves no purpose.

Take for example this user's needlessly wordy refutation of Zeno: Why did the world need such a refutation? Anybody who thinks such a refutation necessary has lost their grounding in reality. Anybody who creates such a refutation is just trying to entertain themselves.

Why do you think it's 'needless'?

Holla Forums is influenced by someone's ideas, even if it is Rousseau.

So you think today's State size in America is not large enough?

Why do you think 150+ words to refute Zeno is needed?

It's funny you linked to Arianism when I cited St. Athanasius earlier because he was against Arianism.

What's wrong with trying to entertain oneself though?

I think that's how earlier pre-socratic philosophy developed. Those dudes were creating mental paradoxes to exercise their mind and reason.

Furthermore, Rousseau was a complete idiot. This may come as a disappointment to you, but no matter how many works of white philosophers you read, you will never be white. The essence of white civilization is not found in any philosophical works. It is found in our blood, and you will never experience it.

Feel free to entertain yourself. I don't mind of you pursue philosophy as a hobby to entertain yourself; there are certainly many worse ways to burn your free time.

That someone probably hasn't picked up a philosophy book in his entire life. Many times its just a random guys passing thought and it happens to be a good one so its repeated. You don't need to read Nietzsche to point out the failure of logic in liberals ideas of race.
I'd say its a good size, its not efficient because its a democracy.

I'm not trying to be white, friend. And I surely don't appreaciate Rousseau based on the results of his ideas.

My point is that random guy's passing though is actually the thought of someone else and he doesn't even know it.

You're lucky you just lost a friend and not your front teeth as well.
What a prick.

Pre-Socratic philosophy is probably quite literally shitposting. What better thing to talk about at the bath house than some irritating little problem, these puzzles would be like rare Pepe's, or traded as jokes, mental frameworks for relaxation.

I see. Often. The past inside the present. We clearly Socratic nao.

Physically speaking I'm way more stronger and skilled than him. I'm not saying what I did was right, though.

Okay i'll play your stupid little game

Yes.

Therefore philosophy is just mental masturbation.

No, I think it's the building upon another's ideas even if it's a criticism or a deturpation.

you're trying to fit in and you're trying to sound smart. you're not succeeding at either.

I'm not trying to fit in. You can see it's quite the opposite when I criticize Holla Forums's ideology itself. Also, I've been here since the second exodus of GG.

Those ideas that are now considered to be "science" or "engineering" are based upon philosophical considerations without which they would have never come into existence.
Modern engineering wouldn't be possible without mathematics and what was used to be "natural philosophy". Mathematics had not much use in antiquity and was barely more than a hobby for philosophers to entertain themselves. If people like Euclid hadn't entertained themselves with mathematical ideas there would have been no technological progress. Technology has shaped civilization more than anything else. Thus philosophical ideas are at the foundation of civilization.

They're called singles you fucking retard.

The repeating 09 as well?

you may habe been here since second exodus bu you certainly weren't on Holla Forums, otherwise you wouldn't be spouting shit as retarded as this.

we had problems before and will have problems after jews, it's only natural. every Holla Forumsack worth his salt understand this incredibly simple fact of life. Not you, though.

Typical sophistry, taking credit for accomplishments in one field to give credibility to another. Just like how faggots like Bill Nye point to the moon landing to give "science" credibility, then associate their marxist ideologies with "science" to confer the credibility of the moon landing to sociology. It's a very common sleight of hand.

that has nothing to do with what he was talking about

There's ideology talking.

The fields are related and they influence each other. There's no sophistry at all there. Our culture nowadays is so fucked up today exactly because postmodernists and marxists took over the Humanities - meaning philosophy, theology, sociology, psychology etc.

I hope you know you're an imbecile. go read what I wrote again.

He's using modern engineering accomplishments to lend credibility to philosophy, which is inclusive of bullshit like post-modernism. It's a sleight of hand. When is the last time a philosopher has built a jet fighter?

It's not because something is categorized as philosophy that all the other things that are categorized as such are the same thing.

What do you think started the Scientific Revolution? You're trying to create a battle between STEM and Humanities when there isn't one.

Same understanding. Could you explain further?

The only reason to bring up modern engineering feats in a discussion about political philosophy is because you are perpetrating a sleight of hand.

Why?

you first post was, in a simplified way:
my response:
then you responded with:

it's dishonest and it reeks of leftyfur

I know that I've been lurking and posting here for about 4 years now, maybe less. I know my mindset and I know some agree with me. I know how I was before and I know how I think now. You obviously wants to separate people based on their belief in us/them but I think there are shades there. I was one of "you" but I went my own path. And believe me when I say I was banned more than once before for saying that Holla Forums and other boards and ideologies function in the same way as a cult.

Agree, especially given that the "moon landings" never happened. Nice trips, btw.

Whether or not the moon landing happened is rather beside the point. The sleight of hand is often done with transistors as well:
>Modern transistor miniaturization is amazing, the computers we have are incredibly advanced thanks to science!
>Global warming is science goy. Don't you use a computer? How can you deny science?

That's scientificism. But science and scientific inquiry were influenced by philosophy. Not by post-modern or marxist, but enlightenment and pre-enlightenment philosophy. That is a fact. They were not influenced NOW but along the centuries. That is a fact. Humanities and STEM in normal times are in harmony. The thing is we're not in normal times and I understand where you're coming from based on that.

Please note that he's already admitted he's a shitskin.

Modern engineering has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion about post-modernism and the human trait of losing their grounding in reality when diving into intricate esoteric philosophy. Your attempt to worm modern engineering into this discussion is yet another example of how people can "reason" their way into absurd positions.

It doesn't. You're right. I wasn't the one who introduced modern engineering into the discussion. I'm arguing for how philosophy influences the world and it's not to be underestimated in its power for good and for bad.

One has no defined criteria for proof. The other is or is an application of mathematics. Mathematics, by its nature, does not allow contradiction. Correct models and inputs yield predictable, repeatable results. One gets real-world, tangible shit done. The other doesn't. Guess which one is which.

NatSoc doesn't fabricate an us-them narrative. Those delineations exist as part of nature. In-group favoritism is observable within any ethnic group in the world; it's as innate as any of our behaviors. NatSoc is an alignment of political theory with evidence-based conclusions about man and his relationship with his fellow men. Really, you should be getting behind this because Hitler sought to (and largely succeeded) unify the social classes under a common sense of heritage and patriotism. That sounds pretty good to me.

But that's just cult-thinking, huh? And blind faith in the various permutations of liberation-ideology concocted by tribes of sand-niggers over the last couple millennia isn't cultish? Can you name a single multicultural society that didn't end in disaster? How did it work for the French in Haiti? Diversity and equality are not supported by any evidence or observation, are assumed true as articles of faith, but the guy saying "let's go our separate ways" is the cultist?

Holla Forums you have Reddit, Facebook, the entire MSM and your own containment board here. You can talk about based niggers, etc. all day there. Is this not enough? Is it really necessary that you come here spouting off such obvious nonsense?

A must-read on Postmodernism.

Yes, one gets material shit done. That doesn't mean it doesn't get influenced by ideas. Political, philosophical or whatnot. I don't know much about it but see the influence of Pythagoras and Aristotle on Greek mathematics, for example. Again, there's no battle between STEM and Humanities, they're parts of an integrated knowledge.

It fabricates an narrative of conflict between arbitrarily defined races such as white, blacks, jews and asians, ignoring all the subehtnicities. Along evolution people didn't simply identidy in-group affinity with skin color but culture and physical territory. Also, that in-group favoritism is an organic organization of human beings and it's not enforced by bureaucrats and certainly not on a national level.

Can you name a single society or empire that didn't end in disaster?
All societies (it seems to me) are part of the cycle of nations. Societies don't last very long but they keep rising and falling.

Think of the process of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis - the thesis therein as the capitalist society, the antithesis as revolution, and the synthesis as communism as an endpoint.

We shift the negation of the thesis as capitalist society to the thesis of neoliberal society… and then let it follow from there. It's a hermeneutic cycle, and the fault of the left is assuming that it has an endpoint.

I would venture to say that something new is necessary, as this basis of the absolute has already found its negation. Each Weltgeist exists within its own specific historical circumstances. We craft a new one for our own.

fuck off shill, we see through you

What do you see?

Thank you.

You're seriously projecting, Holla Forumsaks come from all walks of life not just the unemployed one. Speak for yourself please.

I said many, not all.

No, also not 'many'.

How do we know?

Years worth of polls, it's common knowledge. We have people from pizza couriers to contruction work to accounting and law and what have you.

I'll go ahead and assume you're new around here.

How is this thread even a thing? He more or less is a pleb tier entry into all of this.

I feel like the kikes are pouring a lot of money into him so that he can "de-radicalize" many potent and upcoming members.

Little did he know that his entire "arguments" against fascism are but part of the jew lore which is based in lies. The fact is that fascism, nazi's did work, it worked very well actually before. Traditionalism worked as well. Those were natural states of being for healthy people to be in.

No amount of pandering/avoiding to the jew lines will change that fact of history. Shoo alt lite fagget.

Not everyone participates in polls but many can agree with Holla Forums's views. It can be few unemployed or many unemployed. Maybe you are projecting your success on Holla Forumslacks or maybe we each talked with a sample of Holla Forumslacks that confirms our views.

That being said I think it's characteristic of revolutionary and extremist movements to gain young, disenfranchised followers.

something that may interest you
by Miles Mathis; "The Stolen Century" mileswmathis.com/papa.pdf
and "The Cultural Cold War" mileswmathis.com/stoner.pdf
the author describes his vision of the birth of postmodernism

his whole site is worth checking out mileswmathis.com/updates.html

You really are new, go pay attention whenever there's a thread about (un)employment then. I mean it sucks for you if you're down in the dumps, but this place isn't the NEET magnet you're making it out to be. We can always use people with more free time than others though so it's all cool.

No problem at all. Glad to help in any way I can.

I wish you faggots would fuck off, go back to leftypol and quit trying to "figure us out". If you really want to understand why fascists become fascists go visit your local (formerly white) ghetto or barrio. There's no philosophical or convoluted reason as to why whites hate subhumans, they are simply a scourge.

This is typical Holla Forums horse shit. There is actual difference between the races. There will always be conflict between the races because it is the nature of our lessers to cause conflict. Take a good and honest look at what is happening in Sweden.

If you have a colony of killer bees you may find that some of those killer bees are not aggressive. However, most are, and so killer bees are as a whole a problem. The same is true of niggers. Negroes are on average less intelligent, much more prone to violent crime, and any place on this planet that they exist as a majority inevitably turns to shit. I don't care if there are exceptions to the rule. Tolerating those exceptions is not worth the cost of having to tolerate the rest of their kind.

I didn't say there wasn't differences between races but that the categories are too broad. But maybe I'm wrong. I'm no biologist.

Here you throw out your "many of us have failed at life" statement without supporting that statement at all.

Then you critique this guy for basing his opinion on polls

Where as you seemingly have nothing at all supporting your "many of us are failures" statement. Speak for yourself, faggot.

I don't know your story. As said before, I didn't say all Holla Forumslacks but many.

That's why I wrote "or maybe we each talked with a sample of Holla Forumslacks that confirms our views."

It's difficult to know who's right in an anonymous board, after all.

You don't need to be a goddamn biologist to know that black people in white countries is a problem for white people.

Well, you need to be a biologist to interpret the information presented in that post, compare it with the area's literature and see if it's right or not.

Didn't stop you from making one up in your head.

That's why I said "many" not "all". Of course there are people from all walks of life here. Now what is the ratio between successful and unsuccessful people here? Hard to know.

Even if you lack the knowledge to understand that post, it's should still be obvious to you that blacks are inferior and that racial equality is a fairy tale.

I don't know, man. Obvious answers are too obvious. I think it's better to delve into that topic's literature and debate it with people of opposite views to see what you get out of it.

...

But isn't that true? It's a big maybe, at best.

The "debate" has already taken place many times, and the clear results of that debate are that racial equality is a fairy tale. No wonder you failed at life. Your limp dick responses here make you the perfect spokesperson for postmodernism.

Maybe Santa Claus is real and goes tanning on Venus. If you don't know, then don't pull statements out of your ass.

Have fun navigating life like that
faggot

I feel we have hit a soft spot with the amount of shilling in this thread.
I hope we can move forward and see where this gets us.

You know? That one could probably be quite useful to us.

NOTHING scares normalfags more than STD's. Spreading the fact that almost half of niggers have herps would be quite a nail in miscegenation's coffin.

Were those debates done with proper scholars of the subject defending both sides or was it done by Holla Forumslacks?

Well, I based it on my conversation with other Holla Forumslacks along the years as well as reading many topics here about depression and life situation and whatnot. Seeing other revolutionary movements and cults in general also made me this was kind of true for Holla Forums as well.

Blacks who are living in western countries still suffer many times more STDs than white people. The government used to keep record of it, but took that record down due to outrage. Does anybody still have the link to that? I know you can still load it with archive or the waybackmachine.

just a note:
>cdc.gov/std/health-disparities/race.htm
^this page no longer exists; says it was last updated about a year ago.
That image needs to be updated.

Here's one that I quickly found with google. The data comes from the United States.

cdc.gov/std/stats14/minorities.htm

The chlamydia rate among black men was 7.3 times the rate among white men

The rate of gonorrhea among blacks in 2014 was 405.4 cases per 100,000 population, which was 10.6 times the rate among whites

The P&S syphilis rate among blacks in 2014 was 18.9 cases per 100,000 population, which was 5.4 times the rate among whites

The rate of congenital syphilis among blacks in 2014 was 38.2 cases per 100,000 live births, which was 10.3 times the rate among whites

A debate is only valid if it's done with "proper scholars" goys!

Fuck off.

I was just flipping through this myself:
cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5915a3.htm

Well, what can one get out of a debate constituted of two mechanics talking about nuclear physics? I don't think they'd be prepared for it much in the same way as theywouldn't be prepared to talk scientifically about race.

This subject is not nuclear physics. Chimpanzees are on average less intelligent than humans. I don't need to be a biologist to make such a statement. It's obvious - and the fact that blacks are less intelligent and more prone to violence than higher races is just as obvious.

One only needs to take an honest look at Africa to see this. The average IQ in Africa is in the 70s. In western countries that goes up to the 80s because you have "mixed" blacks being counted with the black population.

When a tsunami hit Japan and thousands of Japanese suddenly found themselves in a chaotic situation without law and order, those Japanese came together and worked together. Crime was nearly unheard of. When hurricane Katrina hit the US coast thousands of niggers who found themselves in the same situation immediately began to rape, loot, and murder. The same was seen in the aftermath of the Haiti earthquake. In addition to raping, murdering, and looting in massive numbers black also formed blockades on the streets and shot at helicopters that were trying to deliver relief supplies.

Africa is a cesspool of rape and murder. When white countries import black people the rates of violence, rape, and murder invariably increase. Take a look at what is happening in Sweden and accept reality for what it is or fuck off in denial like the limp dicked postmodernist failure that you probably are.

Well, you know, maybe you guys are right. I'm certainly not qualified or well-read enough to judge that, though. It could be inherent to race or maybe it's culture. Even if it's right I don't see how that supports the claim that Nazism is a good or perfect political way to go.

Seriously go back to Holla Forums faggot. You come here with all of these assumptions about why us evil rightwingers are so "maligned" and when people disagree you continue stick to your previous assumptions. You're not really trying to figure anything out or pick anyone's brains, you're here to prove a point to yourself regardless of what anyone says.
This is a cornerstone of leftist thinking patterns. When you are presented with evidence contrary to your concept of how the world works, you stick to your guns and rationalize that any other explanation is an outlier.
This is exactly how leftists rationalize subhuman violence.
Now, instead of coming in here like a smarmy prick, seriously go visit some "enriched" areas and mingle with the locals. You won't have to postulate or philosophize why so many whites just mysteriously happen to hate shitskins (because of our personal failings, right?).

You'll quickly realize that shitskins are very different from us. They do not think the way whites do, they have no respect for their surroundings, they do not value the same things we do. They are not conducive to maintaining western society. They are a different species, honestly. Once you take away the veneer of western materialism you will see just how alien they are. They do not give a shit about philosophy like you do, they cannot think abstractly enough to even comprehend the shit you care about. These people are borderline retarded for white standards.
So no, it is not our fault, it is not our personal failings that lead ALL whites to distant themselves from shitskins, we are just incompatible. Even the most cucky lefty libshit like yourself will pull his kids out of "enriched" schools and move to neighborhoods with less ethnic looking neighbors. It is us whites who are not affluent enough to run away and profiteer off of the importation of subhumans who have to suffer through their presence in society. The people who are "redpilled" are the people who have interacted with shitskins and learned their lesson. Leftists are people who have never interacted with them, or have in a controlled environment, or moved away too quickly and rationalized their experience.

Most of what you experience in life is not philosophical. The majority of people on Earth and most of the races outside of the white race know almost nothing of abstract thinking and concepts, they continue to flourish. Most of the time things are as they are presented. There is no need to ponder the existential reason as to why sea otters do not think like humans, they are simply just animals. The same principle applies to subhumans. I do not need to ponder why niggers don't act like whites, they are just inferior by nature. Stop being a faggot and stop trying to work yourself up trying to understand why nature is nature.

Nobody said that Nazism was perfect. There is no perfect political system. However, it is certainly better than what we currently have, as our current system is leading us towards white genocide.

I'm quite the opposite of a lefty, actually. I consider myself a Catholic Traditionalist, that's kind of more conservative than Nazism itself or any other modern revolutionary ideology. I don't know why you're denying that many people here and in SJW and other revolutionary movements have problems and they go to politics to try to find an answer to them. Also I really can't say "blacks are subhumans" or "they should be treated like animals". For me, that's just evil, you know? I couldn'y say that with honesty without knowing I'm kinda fucked up in the head or that my politics are a reflection of myself.

Conservative in what way?

Why not? Whites treat animals well.

Your denial is emotional and a testament to your own brainwashing. What is "evil" is to pretend that there are not huge differences between the races as this political correctness is leading towards white genocide.

Conservative as in pre-enlightenment, pre-modernism, pre-materialism thinking.

Because they're human.

I don't like political correctness either.
I don't think someone becomes more rational because he lacks empathy. I think he just becomes more cruel and more like an animal, actually.

Maybe there are. I think the consensus says that there aren't much, maybe a bit in IQ.

If you can't admit that, are you at least able to admit that white people have no obligation to allow black, or any other race so detrimental to and incompatible with whites, into into their society?
How can this possibly be a thing that we have a duty to do? It's like saying that I have a duty to house and feed wild jackals in my home, and that if they kill a few of my children, then that's just the price we have to pay to live in a an equitable and just society.

I think border screening should be based on a individual level rather than racial. Or maybe on how much one can contribute to a certain nation economically or philosophically. What can he bring to this civilization?

I didn't state that empathy was a bad thing, nor do I lack empathy. I stated that your denial of reality was emotional and not rational.

The differences are pretty huge. Their aggression is much more a problem than their low IQs.

Worshiping the kike god and following the religious foundation of modern day communism isn't "conservative", and stop using the jewish slang for national socialist.
So, I guess I was wrong, you're not a lefty, you're a typical univeralist christcuck whose main prerogative is his semitic faith and not his people. I've seen many whites like you, with their mind full of hebraic poison.

You're seriously an idiot if you think disliking subhumans stems from having some deep seated emotional problem. The fact is, subhumans were treated as subhuman for the majority of history, and only recently has the west been indoctrinated to forgive them of their inherent nature.

Blacks are not evil, they are just animals. they exist on a different plane of thought compared to you and I. I do not call hyenas "evil" when they steal meat from a lion, that is simply their nature and the way they have evolved to survive. Blacks are incompatible with whites. Their proximity to us causes bad things to happen. I would not put a lion in a cage with a hyena. They are different animals with different natures vying for the same resources, just as the various human races. The lion and the hyena are not evil, but the act of putting them in the same cage is an evil act. This is "multiculturalism". Multiculturalism is evil.

Also, stop feelings so damn sorry for the lesser races. They are what they are, and you're not evil for pointing it out. Nature is a hierarchy, and if you start treating all things in nature as equal you will quickly be overtaken by people who aren't as hopelessly ideological as you. If an eagle starts feeling sorry because the finches cannot catch its prey, what should it do? Stop hunting? let the finches take its meals? Do you know what happens to the "kind" eagle who willfully allows itself to be usurped? He and his whole species will dwindle and die. All because of his "kindness".
Christians are broken in a sense that they believe that self-flagellation and endless guilt are the key to salvation. You do not work within nature, you resent it. You would rather die a slave than live as something great if you have to hurt another group's feelings.

I suggest you rid your mind of "philosophy" and sophistry and start seeing the world as what it actually is, a hierarchy working within the confines of nature's various laws.

We have seen the fruits of multiculturalism. Multiculturalism has done nothing but bring us down and threaten us with genocide. Blacks should be sent home if they try to enter white countries.

It would turn racial naturally. Any standard of screening worth upholding would keep 99.9% of non-whites out.

This is pretty much impossible. You are just trying to avoid accepting what you believe to be "evil racism".
The instant any such selectivity results in a higher percentage of whites be allowed in (so, immediately), that will be when we hear how such selectivity is racist and must be ended. So we are right back to where we are now.

We built it. It's ours. We owe them nothing. We tried to uplift them over and over and over again. What have we gained out of it?

It may turn and if it does, what can you do? Just don't use race as criteria in the first place.

You have a rather Nietzschean line of thought there. I say that based on your comment of dying like a slave. You saying I should forget philosophy sounds to me like you're trying to shut down my thought processes and fully believe on what you say. Is that brainwashing? I'd rather search for Truth.

Also, I'm half-white and I think black people have souls much in the same way everyone does. Hierarchical structures emerge naturally. I'm not for its elimination. It's not possible. But I don't think it should be artificially enforced on a state level based on racial parameters. It's a shaky structure prone to power struggles and based on a notion of black inferiority that doesn't seem to be scientifically proven to me.

I'm trying to comprehend reality and I think those answers you find so obvious are not so obvious and demand further investigation.

Is it that Warrior Gene thing?

No, this is even worse than letting in the bottom of the barrel.
Do you know what happens when we let the "best and brightest" or other races into our homelands? They work even more efficiently at siphoning our resources. The amount of high IQ Chinese spies and real estate mongers working against the US and Canada is ridiculous.
The high-caste Indians are taking away jobs suited for middle class whites.
Upper-class Mexicans are buying out and funding some of our media companies to push for more mestizo immigrants to enter the US.
And the most glaring example of this civnat theory absolutely not working is the importation of jews. They are successfully taken over many of our institutions with their nepotism and ethnic solidarity.

Your HOMELAND should not be an economic free-for-all for the various races of the world. Everything your white ancestors built should not be subject to being bought out by any random foreigner willing to pay. Remember that every other race besides the white race still has ethinic solidarity with their own. Any rich chinamen will send their money to china, not you. Any rich arab will send their money to arabia, not you. You are allowing your people to be bent over and fucked, with the end result being your once homogeneous prosperous nation being ravished and turned into a giant multicult stripmall where the world's various tycoons come to profiteer.

I would rather have the mindless subhuman drones entering my homeland rather than their elite. They are so much more insidious than your average welfare leech wetback.

When European discovered the Aboriginals of Australia, they were EATING newborn children.

No, you are absolutely wrong. These non-whites do not think "how can I improve America?" they think "how can I take American resources to improve my own people?". They do nothing for us, they only enter to improve their own life and the lives of their countrymen back home.

Please do NOT think this way.

Not all, of course.

Maybe the answer is to close borders but the inner culture is based on what? Skin color only?

...

This explains your inability to let go of multiculturalism and accept reality. The facts are already in, and the truth is obvious to everybody who is not in denial. Racial equality is a fairy tale and blacks are inferior.

...

I certainly agree with that. Don't know if skin color is crucial factor there, though.

This is why everyone sees whites as faggots. You have the truth in front of you but you go searching for a more "interesting" answer. That more interesting answer usually involved you opening yourself and your people up to attack.
You'd rather piddle off and think about your civnat masturbation fantasy where all of the rainbow people of the world come together in your nation and worship the constitution.
The real world isn't like that, and it should be glaringly obvious that your civnat fantasies are not working, but are in fact very harmful. Subhumans have only destroyed. It's time accept this and actually do something to reverse it. And "philosophy" won't reverse shit, btw. The majority of non-whites here are borderline retarded and couldn't even comprehend your theories about how society should function, and even if they could, they have a better deal living off gibs than actually giving a damn. America is turning brown and headed for death, philosophy will not save you, in fact, it keeps you weak.

Tell me, why do you hate whites so much? Why do you hate your own people so much that you'd rather see them replaced with your magic subhumans? You'd rather turn america into a melting pot of "the best and brightest" than leaving it as it is.

So you're a mongrel christcuck? I'm done wasting my time with you, then. Being a civnat leech is the path that leads to YOUR salvation, not the salvation of the white race.

Culture is the social expression of successful biological behavior.

He isn't white.

Our people are white. We are trying to preserve our people and prevent white genocide. To stop white genocide we need white exclusive communities. Obviously this means denying the shitskin hordes entry. Yes, the answer is to say no to niggers.

Yes, all. You are a great example, btw. Since you are a mongrel you fight for a mongrel nation. You have a racial allegiance to your own kind, which is antithetical to what white nations should be.
Maybe you should meditate on that, oh great philosopher. I am right, just about everything people do in a multiracial society comes down too racial alliance, and philosophy takes a backseat. You yourself are an expression of that. It's kinda funny in a sad way.
Another subhuman meme. Whites could be purple, Asians could be green. It's not about skin color, it's about everything in your genetic code, and your actions that reflect from it.

I'm not white and not even American. As I said before, maybe there are major differences between races but you can't derive an ought from an is, meaning even if there are differences what should be done is an ethical choice and for me any state decision based on race, no matter how small it is, is wrong and can lead to murderous consequences.

I came to shit on postmodernism and ideologies, though.

I realized that as I wrote the second half of my post. Mongrels are as fervent as jews when it comes to the desire for a "civic nationalist" rainbow nation.

Your opinions are useless, mongrel. Everything you say is just pleas for your salvation in white society, and don't actually mean anything "philosophical". It's just a smart dressing to your desperation. You will say anything and everything to remain in a white nation, nothing more. You're just another genetic problem whites will have to deal with in the future.

You think I fell into the trappings of philosophy but I think you fell into the trappings of racial ideology and that is warping your view (no offense). It seems to me all your questions are answered by race and you're kinda arrogant and fast in saying you're right. From my experience most people who say that aren't really searching for Truth because they don't doubt themselves and their beliefs.
Just trying to give you some constructive criticism here.

Your morality is flawed.

This is your racial instinct. You think it's rational though, but it isn't. Your obsession with philosophy and existing in your mind is because you realize you don't have a real identity other that being an outsider.

t. every multicult/civnat ever.

The truth is very simple. There is difference between the races, and blacks are at the very bottom of the barrel. You are not a seeker of truth. You are in denial of the truth because it will make you feel bad.

The amish and the mormons have the most white communities in the USA and they also produce the most white children.

"seeker or truth" means "reality is too mean, if I make up my own story the world is easier for me to digest :)"

I think that basing your identity on something as simple as skin color is also a kind of way of coping. Dividing the way you see the whole world in 3 or 4 basic races is not so different as seeing everything being about the patriarchy or the bourgeouisie. It's a simple answer to everything.

...

...

The difference between the races goes well beyond that of skin color. Multiculturalism has clearly failed and blacks only bring society down. So, in this case the solution is simple. Remove the blacks.

meant for

for you

an albino negro is still a negro

There are objective truths that you are ignoring because they are uncomfortable to you, the self-professed seeker of truth.

Will you stop fucking saying that, you half monkey? It's not because I don't like the color brown that I don't want negroes in my society.

If you dyed Jamal's skin orange he'd still be a nigger.

I think you guys are right. The fact I'm mixed race probably gives me the perspective of not caring much about race especially because I live in Brazil and all.

If that wasn't explicit enough:
A race of albino negros are still negros

And now it all makes sense.

Excuse me if I have no interest in my county becoming another Brazil.

Even then you should be able to objectively see the difference between certain races' attitudes and cultures.
If white genocide was actually happening and whites went extinct, would it matter to you?

Wouldn't what you call nigger behavior be more related to a clash between civilization and barbarism than race itself? Much in the same way as the Saxons, Goths, Vandals and other people were considered as barbarians by ancient Rome?

I don't want anyone to go extinct, actually.

Will you fucking desperate shitskins get a new line? I'll tell you something, because you are a subhuman your life is going to suck, that's a fact. You're very lucky you were born in a time where whites were cucked enough to let you have a taste of their great nations. You pretty much caught lightning in a bottle, you're one of the most lucky subhumans to ever exist on this planet. I know you don't want to give it up, really, I understand. But this sweet deal can't last forever and eventually it has to change.

Either you're going to turn every white nation into a brown 3rd world shithole and have it be more like your shitty ancestral homeland, or whites are going to kick you out and you'll be living in your shitty ancestral homeland. There's really no other option. If you were smart then you'd focus more on making brown nations less shitty (good luck, kek) instead of hanging onto the white man's teet, which is getting close to drying up. But then again, subhumans aren't really known to plan for the future so I don't expect much from you.

If you think anyone is ever going to vote for national socialism you are deluded as fuck.
If you think that there will be a national socialist revolution you are even more deluded.
But hey, keep entertaining yourself with political philosophy,

Shit, man. I tried to talk to you but it looks like you just want to say how right you aret and to throw jabs at me.

Africa is a cesspool of rape and murder. If it was just a cultural thing then blacks who have been removed from Africa should not engage in violent crime in much higher numbers, and yet they do still engage in violent crime in much higher numbers regardless of income or culture.

Why not? What difference would it make if it's just skin color? And why would you say a white ethnostate is unethical?

Those Germanic whites in the time of Rome were considered barbarians to the Romans.
Niggers were considered animals.
So no, nigger, trying to equate your race to the Germanic race is not applicable. I know you really want to make everything relative but honestly you can't. Niggers are just that bad.

Niggers were considered animals throughout all of history, only in the last ~80 years has that become taboo. That's one lifetime, and look how much havoc they have wrecked.

But didn't barbarians engage in that sort of behavior for centuries until they got christianized?

You come here and ignore the information that has been given to you and proceed to repeat yourself endlessly without learning. You deserve the jabs.

Yes, it's kind of like if I said the grass is green and water is wet. Subhumans are subhumans, and there's no getting around that. There's really no philosophical debate to be had about hard truths.

Rape in Germania, Ireland and other places was a capital offence.

We have been over this countless times here, but no. Thousands of years of history and billions if not trillions of dollars worth of resources and charity have disproved this idea. No other race has been the recipient of such a determined effort to improve, educate, and civilize. These are incredible gifts, but the africans are relentless in scorning them. They simply do not value these things.

People are alive today who voted for national socialism, you dumb fuck.

You're missing the point. Culture can drive such behavior, but when culture is at fault the problem goes away when the culture changes. Blacks are much more prone to violence and much less intelligent than the other races regardless of what culture they grow up in.

I'm questioning if there's anything to learn, actually.

Yeah, I don't think we can have a debate.

So they can't be civilized?

There isn't really anything to learn, so much as unlearn. The jewish poison has convinced most people that grass is pink and water is dry.
When your average "educated" person sees a nigger in africa chucking spears and eating bugs they are programmed to think "those poor underprivileged humans, this must be my fault. I must help them. With a little education this man could become a doctor!" instead of, naturally, seeing this and thinking "huh, a bipedal monkey".

Well, you said extinction and I presumed it was the purposeful extermination of someone and of course I don't want that, but I also wouldn't want, for example, to forbid interracial couples and such. That's an individual choice to make. I don't think a white ethnostate would be unethical but I'd be worried on how it'd be formed and how people of other ethnicities that already lived there would be treated. Also that doesn't align with my Catholic views.

Because there is nothing to debate. If you honestly think that niggers can rise up in our lifetimes you are deluded. You are so "educated" you have gone stupid.
Besides I don't really give a fuck about what a halfbreed thinks, you are exactly what I expect a halfbreed to be. If you were white then maybe I would have a vested interest in your "redpilling", but the way I see it, you're actually more useful to me being a dumb monkey. That way more whites can see what a plague you are.

How many more generations of resources do we have to squander on them? Why?

Some are obviously adaptable or intelligent enough to live in civilized countries peacefully and productively. This is not the same as saying that negros can, or indeed desire to, build a civilization that in any way compares to a white society.

A dog can be domesticated. A chimpanzee can be trained. I'm sure "some" negroes can be "civilized" to behave in society, but the nature of the negro will ensure that large populations of negroes will always be a problem. We gain nothing from allowing negroes in our countries. We only lose from the deal.

There is no reason why we should continue to replace good white people with filthy subhuman niggers.

.>>9993056
Really?
How many votes did the NSAWP get this election?

Hm, philosophy. Is philosophy just a codeword word for "making sure my ass is spared"?

"white man's burden", familiarize yourself with the concept.
Expend limitless resources to raise up the lesser races so they can compete with you and eventually overcome you. What a great idea.

You kinda make me lose a little faith in humans. No joke. It's not a surprise, though. The thing is only you yourself knows if your bitterness is representative of your own inner landscape and that's on you, not me.

As the leftists tell it, during the crusades entire towns of Muslims in the Levant were depopulated.

We have the right to an ethnostate, but not to have borders?

Oh it is, this is definitely intentional. Just because its taking place over 80 years or so don't mean it's not intentional.

Not really a choice when no blacks are allowed into your country. If you want to choose that, you can leave. No one will stop you.

I think there's some contestation about that by apologists, I'm not sure. It's hard to trust leftists with the history about Christianity. As far as I know, the crusades started as self-defense and got out of control. Genocide is always wrong, though;

Please lose your faith in humans (white people). We don't care about your nigger ass. Not even the most diehard shitlib wants to live in close vicinity to you. Tolerating your destructive behavior is literally a fashionable trend being pushed by the kikes, and it won't last. Please retire to your monkey hovel in Brazil and stop worrying about the problems of human beings.

And lel, my "inner landscape". You're fucking funny. It's not any fault of mine that your people are bipedal animals. The only fault of mine is that I have eyes to see it.

If things don't change, by 2050, Africa's population is going to explode. Africa itself cannot sustain it's own population without European help.
Where will they go?
We didn't ask for this. If you think the people here have become like this because they crave murder, you don't understand anything.

Well, I'm off to sleep, fellas. Have a good night.

Wow, you actually retired to your monkey hovel. I guess my ancestors were right, blacks really can be domesticated if the white man has the right attitude. :)

'Night. Try not to get culturally enriched in your sleep by favela subhumans.

Funny thing.
Africa is capable of feeding its population and then some.
Problem is Africans aren't capable of properly utilising the available resources to do so

WHY THE FUCK IS THIS ANCHORED
FUCKING ILLITERATE FAGGOT MODS
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Africa is, no contest. Sub-Saharans on the other hand never could into farming.

Oh they can into farming.
They just can't into farming beyond stone age levels. Not on their own anyways.
As Rhodesia proved so long as whitey is around to instruct him and run things then the negro is perfectly capable of engaging in modern farming practices.

I'm aware. It's hard to consider techniques that would have been considered primitive by Sumerian standards to be farming though.

Aaaand there it is.

is this thread going on? Srsly why are you entertaining somekind of blue pilled retard? This board has standards and that guy lies far away from those standards. I think the hardest part of his is to accept that he is lower than our average members here…but also on halfpol.

it is almost a disgrace to be using such basics here with people who are supposed to have learned this 5 years ago.

there are more differences between races than there are commonalities.

What were those standards you were referring to again?

the ones on 5 years worth of racial realism study at the very least.

pastebin.com/4qDqptnR
youtube.com/watch?v=W8N3FF_3KvU
whitelocust.wordpress.com/morality-and-abstract-thinking-how-africans-may-differ-from-westerners/
majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/the_health_consequences_of_race_mixing/
youtube.com/watch?v=7OwV-zfbHoY

is just a small part of that, small and basic start. You are just a fucking uneducated mongoloid. All of this what we are doing now is not because somekind of mystical desire to be evil or whatever. The right way to view the world offers actual credible and scientific solutions.

If you actually valued truth and science you would know that truth comes before morality. Whatever the conclusions lead to, one must follow them, for there is no greater thing in life than the pursuit of truth.

truth on a great many things, I suggest you make yourself be banned and fuck off and lurk moar fagget.

What the fuck are you sperging out about and why are you still saging an anchored thread?
I think you're the only uneducated mongoloid here, friendo.

...

Full retard.

samefag here. what the fuck happened to this thread

Because it got derailed into oblivion

Why is that a bad thing? Truth and logic are objective, but perception and meaningfulness is subjective. Ideologies provide lens for one to perceive and create their reality. More importantly, it does this by providing goals. What one must do is judge these goals based on truth and logic (or rather, logical understanding of morality)

Why is everyone so bad at philosophy?