Right Wing Discussion Thread The Fourth

[Dagashi Shojo]

Nietzsche is the exception here, though. You're downplaying how influential he was.

Fair enough. Though he only really became influential after his death.

This doesn't refute anything Stirner, Rand or Nietzsche said, though. Perhaps its just that you're incapable of actually engaging their ideas and are attacking their character? Or are you projecting your subjective ideas about what is and isn't egoistic onto reality, and thus concluding they aren't significant because they don't fit your conception?

Nothing I said was an attack on their character, rather it was a humorous quip about how, despite the "herd animals" being spooked, they do tend to accomplish more than the ubermensch do. If I wanted to write a critique of their beliefs, I'd do it some place other than NSG.

[Conscentia]

Nietzsche is the exception here, though. You're downplaying how influential he was.

Fair enough. Though he only really became influential after his death.

This doesn't refute anything Stirner, Rand or Nietzsche said, though. Perhaps its just that you're incapable of actually engaging their ideas and are attacking their character? Or are you projecting your subjective ideas about what is and isn't egoistic onto reality, and thus concluding they aren't significant because they don't fit your conception?

Nothing I said was an attack on their character, rather it was a humorous quip about how, despite the "herd animals" being spooked, they do tend to accomplish more than the ubermensch do. If I wanted to write a critique of their beliefs, I'd do it some place other than NSG.

IIRC, Nietzsche did not believe that he was the superman and don't expect he'd have thought Stirner and Rand were either.

[Conserative Morality]

As a socialist, why shouldn't I despise a man who attacked one of the few alleviating benefits to the poor at the time, in the name of an old reactionary aristocracy?

As a socialist, you should know that socialists of the time opposed Bismarck's welfare state.

[Jochizyd Republic]

It's about how white people have to act differently from other races in their self-identification.

Obviously, yes.

The most glaring example is that there is no particular stigma to being attached to self-described Black Power groups and openly stating your prefer to associate only with other blacks. For non-white minorities a desire to associate with your own never carries any stigma, and is often facilitated by officialdom. The treatment of whites and non-whites is not even remotely symmetrical (the term "asymmetric multiculturalism" exists in Social Science literature for a reason), especially in English speaking democracies.

As Slate informs:

In his highly inventive 2004 book The Rise and Fall of Anglo-America, the sociologist Eric Kaufmann calls this bargain “asymmetrical multiculturalism.” Under asymmetrical multiculturalism, minority ethnic groups are encouraged to assert their group identities and to defend their group interests while the majority ethnic group is strongly discouraged from doing the same. Overt expressions of Jewish, Mexican, Laotian, or Bengali pride are very welcome. Overt expressions of WASP pride, however, are not. Kaufmann maintains that because WASPs, and to a lesser extent other whites, are denied the option of celebrating their ethnic heritage, they instead champion essentially ideological ideas, like individualism or a vague, ill-defined belief in “American exceptionalism” that is bereft of any real cultural content.

Associating with your own race in certain occasion shouldn't be used to exclude people of other races or try to feel superior to them.

"Everyone else does it" is a poor excuse. "It's only natural" is a poorer excuse.

[Dagashi Shojo]

Fair enough. Though he only really became influential after his death.

Nothing I said was an attack on their character, rather it was a humorous quip about how, despite the "herd animals" being spooked, they do tend to accomplish more than the ubermensch do. If I wanted to write a critique of their beliefs, I'd do it some place other than NSG.

IIRC, Nietzsche did not believe that he was the superman and don't expect he'd have thought Stirner and Rand were either.

I was using "ubermensch" sarcastically, and Nietzsche did view himself above the herd.

As a socialist, why shouldn't I despise a man who attacked one of the few alleviating benefits to the poor at the time, in the name of an old reactionary aristocracy?

As a socialist, you should know that socialists of the time opposed Bismarck's welfare state.

And I disagree with them, though their motive was different than Nietzsche's.

[Conserative Morality]

And I disagree with them, though their motive was different than Nietzsche's.

Right, because Nietzsche was a skeptic about the power of contemporary states in general.

[Dagashi Shojo]

And I disagree with them, though their motive was different than Nietzsche's.

Right, because Nietzsche was a skeptic about the power of contemporary states in general.

Could you share me a source for that? From what I recall, it was more because he saw Bismarck's actions as eroding the aristocratic authority.

[The East Marches]

As a socialist, why shouldn't I despise a man who attacked one of the few alleviating benefits to the poor at the time, in the name of an old reactionary aristocracy?

As a socialist, you should know that socialists of the time opposed Bismarck's welfare state.

You should also know that Bismarck met with them before. Though nothing came about of it, Bismarck was incontact with a few early in his career. Though the name of the man escapes at the moment. I shall look through my books and TG it to you when I am home.

[Hans-Hermann Hoppe]

Opposing welfare = vermin.

As a socialist, why shouldn't I despise a man who attacked one of the few alleviating benefits to the poor at the time, in the name of an old reactionary aristocracy?

Supporting welfare is literally rape.

[Neanderthaland]

As a socialist, why shouldn't I despise a man who attacked one of the few alleviating benefits to the poor at the time, in the name of an old reactionary aristocracy?

Supporting welfare is literally rape.

If by "literally" you mean anything other than that.

[Hans-Hermann Hoppe]

Supporting welfare is literally rape.

If my "literally" you mean anything other than that.

It is raping the taxpayer of his money.

[Jochizyd Republic]

As a socialist, why shouldn't I despise a man who attacked one of the few alleviating benefits to the poor at the time, in the name of an old reactionary aristocracy?

Supporting welfare is literally rape.

Ancaps pls

If my "literally" you mean anything other than that.

It is raping the taxpayer of his money.

Wouldn't that make taxes rape then?

[Dagashi Shojo]

If my "literally" you mean anything other than that.

It is raping the taxpayer of his money.

The bourgeois cannot live without the proletariat, but the proletariat can live without the bourgeois. It seems the other way around. :^)

[New confederate ramenia]

It is raping the taxpayer of his money.

The bourgeois cannot live without the proletariat, but the proletariat can live without the bourgeois. It seems the other way around. :^)

And the Proletariat can live without taxation.

[Neanderthaland]

If my "literally" you mean anything other than that.

It is raping the taxpayer of his money.

It's sexually penetrating or forcing sexual penetration of the taxpayer's money?

Words, you see, have actual meanings. "Literally," for instance, doesn't mean "figuratively," because that's the exact opposite concept. Which is what makes it so odd that you people keep using it that way.

[New confederate ramenia]

It is raping the taxpayer of his money.

It's sexually penetrating or forcing sexual penetration of the taxpayer's money?

Words, you see, have actual meanings. "Literally," for instance, doesn't mean "figuratively," because that's the exact opposite concept. Which is what makes it so odd that you people keep using it that way.

Literally literally means figuratively where I live.

[Neanderthaland]

It's sexually penetrating or forcing sexual penetration of the taxpayer's money?

Words, you see, have actual meanings. "Literally," for instance, doesn't mean "figuratively," because that's the exact opposite concept. Which is what makes it so odd that you people keep using it that way.

Literally literally means figuratively where I live.

Where you live is clearly mad.

[New confederate ramenia]

Literally literally means figuratively where I live.

Where you live is clearly mad.

TIL the entire state of California is clearly mad

[Dagashi Shojo]

Where you live is clearly mad.

TIL the entire state of California is clearly mad

Everything after "California" was redundant.

[Jochizyd Republic]

Where you live is clearly mad.

TIL the entire state of California is clearly mad

Mostly just SoCal and the Bay Area.

[The East Marches]

If my "literally" you mean anything other than that.

It is raping the taxpayer of his money.

Does that mean they should be "physically removed" so to speak?

TIL the entire state of California is clearly mad

Mostly just SoCal and the Bay Area.

more like commiefornia amirite?

[New confederate ramenia]

TIL the entire state of California is clearly mad

Mostly just SoCal and the Bay Area.

So the parts where most Californians live in?

Also literally isn't completely the same as figuratively here. They just have really similar definitions, literally is used for emphasis so sometimes it does show exaggeration or figurativeness and sometimes it does mean literally.

more like commiefornia amirite?

Our state produced Reagan the commie remover. We were governed by Schwarzenegger the terminator of totalitarians. We're the least commie state in this union.

[The East Marches]

Our state produced Reagan the commie remover. We were governed by Schwarzenegger the terminator of totalitarians. We're the least commie state in this union.

"least commie" - then why the fuck are your refugees shitting up the rest of the country? I thought things were supposed to be good there. Now your people and their aids ideas are spreading.

Edit: Would California considering keeping its people in if we paid them?

[Jochizyd Republic]

Mostly just SoCal and the Bay Area.

So the parts where most Californians live in?

Also literally isn't completely the same as figuratively here. They just have really similar definitions, literally is used for emphasis so sometimes it does show exaggeration or figurativeness and sometimes it does mean literally.

more like commiefornia amirite?

Our state produced Reagan the commie remover. We were governed by Schwarzenegger the terminator of totalitarians. We're the least commie state in this union.

T R I C K L E D O W N

[Jochizyd Republic]

Our state produced Reagan the commie remover. We were governed by Schwarzenegger the terminator of totalitarians. We're the least commie state in this union.

"least commie" - then why the fuck are your refugees shitting up the rest of the country? I thought things were supposed to be good there. Now your people and their aids ideas are spreading.

Edit: Would California considering keeping its people in if we paid them?

Things are only good some places. This place is rife in it's natural booty. D'ahh...I mean beauty.

LA is actually hell though.