|
i think she should be beheaded by a crowd of jeering gap-toothed filthy 18th century peasants
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 00:39 |
|
|
lmao if her libertarian society were true she would be sold by google to a scientist studying transpeople and then selling their cadavers when he was thru
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
if i had a time machine i'd cleverly swap the winter palace and a giant tech convention
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2014 20:47
|
|
|
because in our techno-feudalist future google will be the largest plantation holder and they want ugly retards to hold the whip
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
lmao does that dork google her name every ten seconds?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
hey gurl i hope you know if your philosophy is actualized people like you will be sold to zoos.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2014 20:51
|
|
|
Manifest posted:Spend all day working in the gmail fields, harvesting ad impressions. in the future it will be illegal to teach IT slaves practical skills Daedra posted:she ain't a girl, just a dude who's afraid to be gay lmbo haha i respectfully disagree lmao
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
imo all rich people should be forced to spend a third of their life giving blowjobs to homeless people but they can be rich the rest of the time. that's the only alternative to socialism ill accept
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
*ironic transphobia* 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
Meg From Family Guy posted:Nothing ironic about this poo poo bitch looks hosed up and should kill itself hahahah! *sustained farting sound*
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
Not a Children posted:Hahahaha how is someone this loving out of touch with the realities of a slavery-supported society? libertarian slavery would be different because you sold yourself into it to prevent starvation
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2014 21:04
|
|
|
OMFG FURRY posted:but thats what slavery already i- no its different in libertarianism you can sell you children into slavery w/o being a slave yourself, like ancient rome,or robocop detroit
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
its not even funny, except that spay and neuter joke, that was funny.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
From the vantage point of elementary economic theory and in light of historical evidence, then, a revisionist view of modern history results. The Whig theory of history, according to which mankind marches continually forward toward ever higher levels of progress, is incorrect. From the viewpoint of those who prefer less exploitation over more and who value farsightedness and individual responsibility above shortsightedness and irresponsibility, the historic transition from monarchy to democracy represents not progress but civilizational decline. Nor does this verdict change if more or other indicators are included. Quite to the contrary. Without question the most important indicator of exploitation and present-orientedness not discussed above is war. Yet if this indicator were included the relative performance of democratic-republican government appears to be even worse, not better. In addition to increased exploitation and social decay, the transition from monarchy to democracy has brought a change from limited warfare to total war, and the 20th century, the age of democracy, must be ranked also among the most murderous periods in all of history.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
you know who else was a moonbat obsessed with democracy? george washington 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 00:42
|
|
|
lmao that dumb bitch thinks futurism in the "guy writing an article for wired about the singularity" sense is the same as "Oh, maternal ditch, half full of muddy water! A factory gutter! I savored a mouthful of strengthening muck which recalled the black teat of my Sudanese nurse!" futurism
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
this person is so goddamn stupid and laughable that i'm just gonna post all of the futurist manifesto here We have been up all night, my friends and I, beneath mosque lamps whose brass cupolas are bright as our souls, because like them they were illuminated by the internal glow of electric hearts. And trampling underfoot our native sloth on opulent Persian carpets, we have been discussing right up to the limits of logic and scrawling the paper with demented writing. Our hearts were filled with an immense pride at feeling ourselves standing quite alone, like lighthouses or like the sentinels in an outpost, facing the army of enemy stars encamped in their celestial bivouacs. Alone with the engineers in the infernal stokeholes of great ships, alone with the black spirits which rage in the belly of rogue locomotives, alone with the drunkards beating their wings against the walls. Then we were suddenly distracted by the rumbling of huge double decker trams that went leaping by, streaked with light like the villages celebrating their festivals, which the Po in flood suddenly knocks down and uproots, and, in the rapids and eddies of a deluge, drags down to the sea. Then the silence increased. As we listened to the last faint prayer of the old canal and the crumbling of the bones of the moribund palaces with their green growth of beard, suddenly the hungry automobiles roared beneath our windows. "Come, my friends!" I said. "Let us go! At last Mythology and the mystic cult of the ideal have been left behind. We are going to be present at the birth of the centaur and we shall soon see the first angels fly! We must break down the gates of life to test the bolts and the padlocks! Let us go! Here is they very first sunrise on earth! Nothing equals the splendor of its red sword which strikes for the first time in our millennial darkness." We went up to the three snorting machines to caress their breasts. I lay along mine like a corpse on its bier, but I suddenly revived again beneath the steering wheel — a guillotine knife — which threatened my stomach. A great sweep of madness brought us sharply back to ourselves and drove us through the streets, steep and deep, like dried up torrents. Here and there unhappy lamps in the windows taught us to despise our mathematical eyes. "Smell," I exclaimed, "smell is good enough for wild beasts!" And we hunted, like young lions, death with its black fur dappled with pale crosses, who ran before us in the vast violet sky, palpable and living. And yet we had no ideal Mistress stretching her form up to the clouds, nor yet a cruel Queen to whom to offer our corpses twisted into the shape of Byzantine rings! No reason to die unless it is the desire to be rid of the too great weight of our courage! We drove on, crushing beneath our burning wheels, like shirt-collars under the iron, the watch dogs on the steps of the houses. Death, tamed, went in front of me at each corner offering me his hand nicely, and sometimes lay on the ground with a noise of creaking jaws giving me velvet glances from the bottom of puddles. "Let us leave good sense behind like a hideous husk and let us hurl ourselves, like fruit spiced with pride, into the immense mouth and breast of the world! Let us feed the unknown, not from despair, but simply to enrich the unfathomable reservoirs of the Absurd!" As soon as I had said these words, I turned sharply back on my tracks with the mad intoxication of puppies biting their tails, and suddenly there were two cyclists disapproving of me and tottering in front of me like two persuasive but contradictory reasons. Their stupid swaying got in my way. What a bore! Pouah! I stopped short, and in disgust hurled myself — vlan! — head over heels in a ditch. Oh, maternal ditch, half full of muddy water! A factory gutter! I savored a mouthful of strengthening muck which recalled the black teat of my Sudanese nurse! As I raised my body, mud-spattered and smelly, I felt the red hot poker of joy deliciously pierce my heart. A crowd of fishermen and gouty naturalists crowded terrified around this marvel. With patient and tentative care they raised high enormous grappling irons to fish up my car, like a vast shark that had run aground. It rose slowly leaving in the ditch, like scales, its heavy coachwork of good sense and its upholstery of comfort. We thought it was dead, my good shark, but I woke it with a single caress of its powerful back, and it was revived running as fast as it could on its fins. Then with my face covered in good factory mud, covered with metal scratches, useless sweat and celestial grime, amidst the complaint of staid fishermen and angry naturalists, we dictated our first will and testament to all the living men on earth. MANIFESTO OF FUTURISM We want to sing the love of danger, the habit of energy and rashness. The essential elements of our poetry will be courage, audacity and revolt. Literature has up to now magnified pensive immobility, ecstasy and slumber. We want to exalt movements of aggression, feverish sleeplessness, the double march, the perilous leap, the slap and the blow with the fist. We declare that the splendor of the world has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed. A racing automobile with its bonnet adorned with great tubes like serpents with explosive breath ... a roaring motor car which seems to run on machine-gun fire, is more beautiful than the Victory of Samothrace. We want to sing the man at the wheel, the ideal axis of which crosses the earth, itself hurled along its orbit. The poet must spend himself with warmth, glamour and prodigality to increase the enthusiastic fervor of the primordial elements. Beauty exists only in struggle. There is no masterpiece that has not an aggressive character. Poetry must be a violent assault on the forces of the unknown, to force them to bow before man. We are on the extreme promontory of the centuries! What is the use of looking behind at the moment when we must open the mysterious shutters of the impossible? Time and Space died yesterday. We are already living in the absolute, since we have already created eternal, omnipresent speed. We want to glorify war — the only cure for the world — militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of the anarchists, the beautiful ideas which kill, and contempt for woman. We want to demolish museums and libraries, fight morality, feminism and all opportunist and utilitarian cowardice. We will sing of the great crowds agitated by work, pleasure and revolt; the multi-colored and polyphonic surf of revolutions in modern capitals: the nocturnal vibration of the arsenals and the workshops beneath their violent electric moons: the gluttonous railway stations devouring smoking serpents; factories suspended from the clouds by the thread of their smoke; bridges with the leap of gymnasts flung across the diabolic cutlery of sunny rivers: adventurous steamers sniffing the horizon; great-breasted locomotives, puffing on the rails like enormous steel horses with long tubes for bridle, and the gliding flight of aeroplanes whose propeller sounds like the flapping of a flag and the applause of enthusiastic crowds. It is in Italy that we are issuing this manifesto of ruinous and incendiary violence, by which we today are founding Futurism, because we want to deliver Italy from its gangrene of professors, archaeologists, tourist guides and antiquaries. Italy has been too long the great second-hand market. We want to get rid of the innumerable museums which cover it with innumerable cemeteries. Museums, cemeteries! Truly identical in their sinister juxtaposition of bodies that do not know each other. Public dormitories where you sleep side by side for ever with beings you hate or do not know. Reciprocal ferocity of the painters and sculptors who murder each other in the same museum with blows of line and color. To make a visit once a year, as one goes to see the graves of our dead once a year, that we could allow! We can even imagine placing flowers once a year at the feet of the Gioconda! But to take our sadness, our fragile courage and our anxiety to the museum every day, that we cannot admit! Do you want to poison yourselves? Do you want to rot? What can you find in an old picture except the painful contortions of the artist trying to break uncrossable barriers which obstruct the full expression of his dream? To admire an old picture is to pour our sensibility into a funeral urn instead of casting it forward with violent spurts of creation and action. Do you want to waste the best part of your strength in a useless admiration of the past, from which you will emerge exhausted, diminished, trampled on? Indeed daily visits to museums, libraries and academies (those cemeteries of wasted effort, calvaries of crucified dreams, registers of false starts!) is for artists what prolonged supervision by the parents is for intelligent young men, drunk with their own talent and ambition. For the dying, for invalids and for prisoners it may be all right. It is, perhaps, some sort of balm for their wounds, the admirable past, at a moment when the future is denied them. But we will have none of it, we, the young, strong and living Futurists! Let the good incendiaries with charred fingers come! Here they are! Heap up the fire to the shelves of the libraries! Divert the canals to flood the cellars of the museums! Let the glorious canvases swim ashore! Take the picks and hammers! Undermine the foundation of venerable towns! The oldest among us are not yet thirty years old: we have therefore at least ten years to accomplish our task. When we are forty let younger and stronger men than we throw us in the waste paper basket like useless manuscripts! They will come against us from afar, leaping on the light cadence of their first poems, clutching the air with their predatory fingers and sniffing at the gates of the academies the good scent of our decaying spirits, already promised to the catacombs of the libraries. But we shall not be there. They will find us at last one winter's night in the depths of the country in a sad hangar echoing with the notes of the monotonous rain, crouched near our trembling aeroplanes, warming our hands at the wretched fire which our books of today will make when they flame gaily beneath the glittering flight of their pictures. They will crowd around us, panting with anguish and disappointment, and exasperated by our proud indefatigable courage, will hurl themselves forward to kill us, with all the more hatred as their hearts will be drunk with love and admiration for us. And strong healthy Injustice will shine radiantly from their eyes. For art can only be violence, cruelty, injustice. The oldest among us are not yet thirty, and yet we have already wasted treasures, treasures of strength, love, courage and keen will, hastily, deliriously, without thinking, with all our might, till we are out of breath. Look at us! We are not out of breath, our hearts are not in the least tired. For they are nourished by fire, hatred and speed! Does this surprise you? it is because you do not even remember being alive! Standing on the world's summit, we launch once more our challenge to the stars! Your objections? All right! I know them! Of course! We know just what our beautiful false intelligence affirms: "We are only the sum and the prolongation of our ancestors," it says. Perhaps! All right! What does it matter? But we will not listen! Take care not to repeat those infamous words! Instead, lift up your head! Standing on the world's summit we launch once again our insolent challenge to the stars!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 01:27
|
|
|
does anyone else want to glorify war — the only cure for the world — militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of the anarchists, the beautiful ideas which kill, and contempt for woman?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 01:29
|
|
|
jackyl man you owe it to yourself to read that big wall of text trust me.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 01:32
|
|
|
Calvin Johnson Jr. posted:I've never seen someone use so many words to say so little you've clearly never taken an english class on critical analysis of postmodern literature
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 01:38
|
|
|
you don't want to demolish museums and libraries, fight morality, feminism and all opportunist and utilitarian cowardice?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
who wants to declare that the splendor of the world has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
modern futurists don't hold a fuckin candle to the original ones imo
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
   
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 02:09
|
|
|
i'd like to trace her head into a bascket, and her blood into a folk remedy for superstitious, grubby, hill people
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 03:15
|
|
|
From the vantage point of elementary economic theory and in light of historical evidence, then, a revisionist view of modern history results. The Whig theory of history, according to which mankind marches continually forward toward ever higher levels of progress, is incorrect. From the viewpoint of those who prefer less exploitation over more and who value farsightedness and individual responsibility above shortsightedness and irresponsibility, the historic transition from monarchy to democracy represents not progress but civilizational decline. Nor does this verdict change if more or other indicators are included. Quite to the contrary. Without question the most important indicator of exploitation and present-orientedness not discussed above is war. Yet if this indicator were included the relative performance of democratic-republican government appears to be even worse, not better. In addition to increased exploitation and social decay, the transition from monarchy to democracy has brought a change from limited warfare to total war, and the 20th century, the age of democracy, must be ranked also among the most murderous periods in all of history.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 03:23
|
|
|
lmao are you talkin about that dark enlightenment poo poo
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 03:35
|
|
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/darkenlightenment
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 03:38
|
|
|
hemophilia posted:Someone post more about whatever dark enlightenment is Secular progressivism is the memetic descendent of Puritan Calvinism and apt descriptors include blasphemy, self-righteous, inquisition, indoctrination, and brainwashing. Therefore, progressive culture is often referred to as “the Cathedral”. The Cathedral consists of influential people in politics, journalism, academia and education acting in a (mostly) uncoordinated manner to advance progressive principles in society; often deceptively. We do not imply conspiracies. Hierarchies are a natural consequence of innate differences in human populations and are necessary for societies to function. Stratified outcomes alone are not enough to prove discrimination or a failure of "social justice". There is no "social justice," only traditional justice. The only morality is civilization. Traditional values are not accidental. They are non-ideological social adaptations that provide good solutions to complex social problems. Cultures separated by vast amounts of time and geography independently converged on similar values. Values converged because cultures that implemented these values had a competitive advantage over their neighbors and became civilizations. Cultures that did not implement them failed and are forgotten. Modern conservatives are last century’s progressives. Many ideas held by “conservatives” today were progressive (sometimes radically so) in the past. The darkly enlightened acknowledge the legitimate flaws inherent to Democracies and are “predisposed, in any case, to perceive the politically awakened masses as a howling irrational mob, it conceives the dynamics of democratization as fundamentally degenerative: systematically consolidating and exacerbating private vices, resentments, and deficiencies until they reach the level of collective criminality and comprehensive social corruption.” A system of No Voice-Free Exit in large hyper-federalist states or small independent city states is the optimal political arrangement. This roughly copies the model of Singapore where there is little political voice, but massive economic freedom and high levels of prosperity. City-states would be in constant competition for minds and business. They risk losing economically valuable citizens and businesses if poorly run because they can easily relocate, thus creating an incentive to remain economically and socially free. Neoreactionaries accept human biological diversity. Individual humans and human groups differ in ability, psychological disposition, intelligence, and other traits for genetic reasons. Disparities result from innate differences. Genetics can explain 50% or more of the differences in lifetime outcomes within and between human groups. Other factors are minor by comparison. Recognition of HBD necessitates the rejection of the core progressive dogma of egalitarianism. Race and gender are not social constructs and everyone personally experiences that not all men or women are created equal. Therefore, it is easier to believe in Leprechauns than to believe in egalitarianism.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 03:42
|
|
|
dark enlightenment is loving hilarious, because it's all pasty dorks who think they're genetically superior and would be some kind of important duke in the feudal techno-libertarian future, when in fact they would be murdered.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 03:45
|
|
|
dark enlightenment also happens to have a like 90% intersection with insane antisemitic neonazi holocaust deniers
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
imo it comes from too many role-playing games and not enough swift kicks in the dick
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 03:49
|
|
|
a lot of them are anarcho capitalists and like i get that such a system would definitely result in feudal monarchies, but like ideologically, dudes who do nothing but jerk it to individual freedom should have a really hard time reconciling tha tw/this poo poo
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 03:51
|
|
|
neoreactionaries are really ridiculous because they think that there's some way to just conjure up new bloodlines in a genuine aristocratic way but i really don't understand how that's possible. unless they just think the hordes fat retarded nouveau rich chinese people will become benevolent enlightened despots somehow i suspect they aren't thinking of rich asians and stuff tho
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 03:53
|
|
|
they think it's gonna be chunky white guys w/wispy mustaches and really annoying grating voices
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 03:54
|
|
|
If we take a closer look at the term "progressivism" we will see the core of our problem. Progress implies movement. It means change. Changing one's goal to something else. When that change is paired with political power, the thing that can actually do it, you will kinda get it. Since progressivism is a kind of a meme virus which defines itself through its ability to designate a specific socio-cultural/legal norm as "the enemy" and through its ability to destroy them, the existence of progressive ideologies is paradoxical. They feed on the things they kill. When they feed enough, they starve and die. Thus the progressive meme virus must either die or change the goal - effectively mutate, in order to survive. Since "progress" can only go by destroying socio-cultural/legal "norms", and the very same socio-cultural/legal "norms" are the building blocks of civilization, "progress" occurs contrary to the divine principles of discrimination by either diminishing the results of reflective potential of discrimination codified in first legal, then socio-cultural ideas, and then by the resource from where they were made possible - manifesting either as stereotypes or more extremely biological reality. Thus, you can asses how much progressive meme virus is powerful by looking at what kind of discrimination is going after - if it's going against legal discrimination (i.e. blacks can't vote) then it's probably very weak. If it's going against something more intangible (i.e. the feminist "Patriarchy" as concept as stupid as its proponents) then it's probably mutated to its extreme. If we tie in a moralistic sentiment here about somethings that cannot be altered, going by the classical liberal ideas of right to liberty (freedom of association,free speech,free thought...), life, pursuit of happiness - you can use any moral system you like, you can asses the moral value of a progressive virus. If it's attacking one of your core moral values, then it's probably immoral. For example, affirmative action and quotas. If it's a side moral value that serves no purpose in your building blocks of morality, then it's probably not. Example, slavery. (Moldbug defends that the slaves had it better not because slavery was innately good, but because the slave masters were very kind, something that is not intrinsically found in slavery.) Here on DE we can easily infer that not every progressive meme virus in every incarnation is just. But what we often forget about, or shy away from because progressive machine wrapped it up in poo poo, is that not every incarnation of every socio-cultural norm is just. Some "progress" is good, some is bad. Some "reaction" is good, some is bad. Depends on the circumstances. That's important. Leftist Singularity does not exist, the chaos will wreak havoc on your society before it's achieved. Rightist Singularity, while stable, is a story for another time. What is important to notice is that "progress" is linear, and the amount of it can be assessed from the current incarnation of the particular meme virus (i.e. feminism) or the political ideas as a whole. Since we established that progress is linear, and some of it is better in certain quantities, it makes sense to build a civilization with retaining some parts of progressivism. Consider the following : *"Progress" first was from Aristocracy to the Right, Nationalism to the Left. Power to the French people, not to the French king. Effectively speaking, nationalism was the first progressivism. Ethno-nationalist trads and other mouthful words are just thinly veiled nationalists who use the current ideas of HBD and anti-progressivism to go back to the time when it dominated. * Now, not only is Nationalism the Right, it's also the Hitler. Since progress has gone so far, it alienated some of the more moderately progressives like libertarians and similar. Hence the reason why they are often included here. Some liberals take it as insult when compared with "muh soggy knee" luhberals and find their place here, since the mouthbreathing Machiavellians who dream of Silicon Reich tend to be more open minded than the people who vilify them. You belong to the paleoconservative or paleoliberal (classical liberal?) spectrum who progress left behind. Technically speaking, you're not a progressive anymore. Also, radishmag has interesting take on "large government is a weak government" idea, so check that out when you can.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 03:55
|
|
|
honestly i thikn libertarianism and ancapism comes primarily from a total rejection of nuance. everything is some kind of theft/not theft binary predicated on property and that weird praxeological principle that hiuman action is inherently logical and you extrapolate that poo poo out. there's just no room for complexity
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:Genetics can explain 50% or more of the differences in lifetime outcomes within and between human groups. Other factors are minor by comparison, (except for when you are a dude that wants to be a chick, in which case genetics is irrelevant and) actually i dont think DE dudes would be down w/transgender peeps
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
Unfortunately Neoreaction really is largely a more erudite version of libertarianism. The idea is simple, Neoreaction conceptualizes the state, not as something antithetical to the market, like Ancaps and ideological libertarians do, but as a corporation, something developed within the market as a solution to a fundamental problem of governance imposed by nature on humanity. In short, Neoreaction subjects the concept of government to conditioning by market forces. This idea is a continuation of libertarianism, and eschews notions of objective civilizational progress to higher levels of happiness, equality, or morality. The point is this, our mass, secular democracies developed according to market forces as a response to the material conditions of modernity. Neoreaction rejects attempts by people like Rawls to derive the current system in idea as one inherently morally superior to other alternatives. This explains why democracy fails in places like the middle east, material conditions there make mass democracy unsuitable as a solution to the problem of governance. Another consequence of this is that, as the conditions of modernity give way to something else, to different material conditions, our mass democratic system is essentially obsoleted by history, which explains the perceived decline of the West. Unlike Marx or other materialists, the collapse of capitalism in this period of late-modernity does not give rise, teleologically, to the completion of the idea of government in actuality, but rather the failure of the system merely gives rise to opportunities to innovate new, more adaptive solutions. This is something Moldbug says explicitly at one point, that the problem of governance has not been universally solved, there is room for further innovation and adaptation. Like many progressives you have in mind a constitutive vision for a morally perfect or complete society that we need to be somehow working towards or attempting to realize, either through the reformation of the current system, or by means of the total replacement of it, through revolution etc. Schiller offers a superior solution to this moral problem however, proving in the Aesthetic Education of Man that the object of politics is not the moral harmony of society, but only the physically and immediately necessary. The harmony of society rather lies absolutely within the confines of the realm of aesthetic culture. Politics cannot be used to bring about a moral society in actuality. Culture represents the limit to which a moral society can exist in reality, and attempts to extend the moral improvement of society beyond the sphere of culture to the physical realm of the actual is to violate the boundaries of truth and morality. "The Cathedral" is a narrative of society that attempts to replace reality in such a way so as to narratize a more moral society into existence, but because all narratives of society are subjective, and not universal, and because all thinking subjects possess the inviolable right to judge, that is to construct such narratives, to attempt to impose a narrative on them is the height of immorality. This is what has lead to the Neo- Victorian moral repression of contemporary social justice. You may find some people to agree with you, there's a lot of Leftist thinking present in Neoreaction. Anarchopapist for example is fundamentally a leftist. You probably have the most in common with the unapologetic fascist ENR sorts. They'll probably agree with a lot of your points about a large powerful state, but they'll inevitably disagree with you about the moral vision that state should be working to realize. That's what really links the right and left, they differ in largely superficial ways while both adhering in form to one another. Neoreaction to me though is about rejection of the political engineering or realization of morality, seeking instead to mitigate subjectivity through the idea of the patchwork, which is not about a large powerful state imposing a moral narrative unto itself in an effort to bring about its own perfection, but about small market-competitive states leaving the realm of morality secure in itself.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 00:39 |
|
|
i honestly don't think that guy even knows what the gently caress he's saying
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 04:09
|
|