Suddenly I’m starting to see more news about covid and there is a possibility of mask mandate again in my country because of exploding cases they say. Are we gonna return to mandatory mask and covid vaccine craziness again? Could things go may that way again this fall? I still think that cannot happen because normals seems like really sick of this covid all together.
tons of norps already had covid multiple times, so the the amount people care is just getting lower and lower as it becomes not so novel or mysterious
I live in Cuckmany and I'm sure these morons will put a mask mandate in place again in October. Feels bad man.
let the old and frail perish from the flu
wizards can be weak but as long as we stay indoors the neet master race will survive
The political system needed is lottery. No elections no tests. No more worries a more fairness because lottery grabs demographic reality naturally. Universal male election by lottery, excluding convicts. Democracy is frail shit. Monarchism is nepotism. With computers we can do this. Election by lottery is fair and limits powermongers getting power.
So you have a parliament of 333 folks because that is a cool number. Every 3 years 1/3 of that body is replaced via powerball. Somebody would be in for a 9 year stint. If the person serves dutifully and honestly their term they get set up with a life stipend afterwards. Mitigates corruption. We are dumb monkeys who cant organize shit apparently so let us be governed by mathematical distribution.
Addendum: the code for the election program should be open source and people should be able to check the database of numerical IDs to maje sure no asshole is removing people. No voluntary removal of yourself from the lottery, akin to jury duty
I'll take my nobel prize now
Very good. I hereby announce the formation of the International Brotherhood of Militant Sortitionists and Gambling Addicts. You are all invited to be members.
>>292455>No voluntary removal of yourself from the lottery, akin to jury duty
>>292454>If the person serves dutifully and honestly their term they get set up with a life stipend afterwards. Mitigates corruption.
yeah and who determines this?
It should be like the military where you get the stipend by default and someone has to go out of their way to punish you
no, really. you are proposing a system to finally defeat corruption, but who determines whether or not these people served dutifully and honestly. another randomly picked committee? and what reward do they receive? and who decides their reward?
we basically just need an AI to rule over us all and remove all people from the equation
So who programs the AI?
just switch it to >>292470
You get the stipend even if you're a lout.
This is an extremely stupid suggestion.
You compare it to jury duty but you say they're in for 9 years. No one would accept that, it's like a prison sentence. You would only be able to implement this system with overwhelming authoritarian force, and at that point you've defeated your own purpose.
Will this thing actually work? I'm pissed neither the virus or the vaccine has killed me.
Oh the tortures of being a politician who gets neetbux for the rest of his life
Not in my country.
ideally another AI smarter than us
And this AI would come from where?
AI dictator government is a pipe-dream not guaranteed. We have the technology right now available to realize government by lottery and make it transparent.
I also think there should be an age restriction to the lottery. Make only men between the ages of 33 and 45 years of age eligible. This captures men in the prime of their life, with some wisdom accumulated but also a degree of flexibility of mind, who have survived past the decades of youthful impetuousness.
People criticizing the forceful nature of this system must realize that the best people to rule are those who do not want power. You already probably have to register for a draft? What is so bad about being subject to a triennial 333/X,000,000 chance of being forced to join a parliament and getting set up financially for life?
I must add, this system is more efficient than democratic systems that use elections. This is because none of the politicians are burdened by the need for electioneering. With the elimination of elections all the pointless cost of this self-whoring and madness of election season is cut out. The ultra-wealthy no longer gain unfair sway from magnanimous campaign contributions. Families are no longer cut in twain by stupid political squabbles. The populace is unburdened from political decision-making and worries that their interests are not being fairly represented as the lottery ensures mathematically that demography is mirrored in the legislative assembly.
In addition, thanks to the Internet and modern communications technologies, assembly members need not uproot their lives and move to some central capital, convening remotely perhaps via VR legislative sessions. In fact this should be encouraged as a central government location is sort of a giant painted target for enemies of the state.
>>292454>democracy but with more retards in parliament
as if the original wasnt enough of a disaster
even if this were the case would you really want clever people having power over you?
it doesn't matter where it comes from if its truly smarter than us. we couldn't control something like that. we'd basically have to beg it to help us out of pity for its creators
Sci fi woo woo. I care more about what can be done now with the tools humanity currently has access to
so you just give everyone who has their number pulled a stipend for life, regardless of their performance. or rely on other people to court martial them for doing a shitty job. i imagine this group that evaluates performance would just get corrupted. so for example they are now by majority leftists, and so the lottery government behaves in a certain way to avoid having their stipend stripped from them
or maybe after every lottery, if the previous government was leftists, the rightists would undo everything they did, and vice versa. maybe some of the popular ideas stick and this leads to some sense of progress however
i dont think there is a proper way to govern millions of people. it will always bloat into dogshit and then collapse. i dont think a lottery would solve anything, it would just make everything more chaotic
what aspects of governance also would be replaced, everything at the state level? i worry what changes a random person would propose at a federal level. if actual democracy is shit, government by lottery is just a more chaotic form of the same shit
i know it's worked for companies or corporations, i think i've read about random promotions. but that is completely different from regularly replacing your entire workforce with random strangers every x years
i dont want anyone to rule me or anyone else, but if i had to have democracy it would be actual democracy where everyone votes on everything. there is literally no reason to have a representative democracy when electronic voting is already in use for elections. theres no more need to send one of your retarded village buddies to the capital city anymore to tell the government what your town thinks, its been centuries since communication was slow enough to warrant that.
i dont think it would be any better. mainstream media would still possess most of the power, ergo whoever can fund the most voluminous presses or loudest speakers generally makes the decisions. it doesnt matter if there is pushback on single (albeit sometimes quite large) issues like vietnam (they were happy to gun down some kids domestically in america for that evil experiment long before ending it, too) when the majority of policy will end up too abstract for most people to comprehend how it does or does not affect their own lives and just be herded to feel certain ways about practically everything.
i unironically think some form of dictatorship or authoritarianism is the optimal way for humanity, although i also must mention that i think every single form of government will always have points of failure. i think something leaning toward dictatorship will just mitigate those points as much as possible.
i am not particularly ardent for a very strong central government, because i also do hold sympathies toward the most intimate and local levels (and even in our supposed democracies those "lowest" levels have been virtually atomized), but i also really think governments that maximize (or profess to maximize) direct representation do not end up functioning anywhere remote toward positive. it would just be giving people the freedom to fuck their own lives up, and for big assholes to exploit them, which is what the west is experiencing a lot of right now (this is not a diatribe against capitalism specifically; socialist movements like communism very clearly faced similar issues and i simply dont like using old labels to juxtapose concepts that shouldnt necessarily be married or divorced from each other).
(deleted multiple times for clarification and simple retard things like double negatives, probably still a lot of mistakes besides grammar)
The idea is that with representative government you get a group of people who dedicate their full time to discussing and pondering issues before coming to a decision, rather than a huge mass of people distracted by professions and labors which would inevitably take priority. Matters of state would become a secondary or tertiary thing at best for most and many would be burdened and divided by political squabbling over who's right and who sides with whom and whatever stupid ideology rather than being peacefully disarmed by the benign tyranny of the random number generator. I want a fatalistic society.
It's all made up, man.>but still believing that democracy is real while obscure sects are secretly ruling he planet
So how do right-winger NEETs justify their political beliefs? I mean, how can you be right-wing when you are a weak male that society thinks is a burden? Right-wing is exactly about getting rid of anyone who is a burden on community or to force them to "man up" and "be useful". I am a devoted leftist because I want things to be distributed equally, so that even I, as a lazy NEET, can get my hands on free resources and stuff. Right-wing wants people to be self-reliant, fuck that. Let me leech off on others' work and success.>>292586
Democracy is a failure and total lie in all cases. The simple reason being that most people are retarded. Direct democracy is crap because the stupid masses get total control, the masses who are so easily deceived and tricked. Representative democracy is crap because it isn't democracy at all, you only choose your tyrant for the next few years BUT you are told all the time how free you are.
I just want a strong Father figure leader or a mommy state to take care of me and my basic needs without forcing me to work. Roman Emperors were quite chill in this regard, even the most immoral ones gave bread and circus to the beggars and NEETs.
There is no need to worry about weaklings when you just give them their space for theirselves. Right wing will start picking on them when their greed grows, since they do not serve as effective slaves.
That's how it goes. The first ones who get the bad treatment in right-wing systems are those who don't contribute anything, not even children to the system. All these NEET-nazis on imageboards make me laugh. They would be the first ones to get gassed alongside jews, trannies, blacks and homeless people.
>>292690>So how do right-winger NEETs justify their political beliefs?
i receive no benefits or help from the government, and seemingly cannot find help, so the current welfare system fails me as a neet, it's worthless, might as well get rid of it. i'm in favor of all social welfare being scrapped, all social workers being fired, and reducing the government budget by all means, and just replacing all that with an equivalent basic income. that would be the only thing that could benefit me welfare wise i believe
Yes but what makes you think you would belong to the privileged ruling classes? I mean I like reading about stuff like this in my room but I wouldn't like to live in some monastery with others. We would - under a radical right-wing government - be forced to work most likely or to join the military.>>292694
Universal basic income is a form of welfare though. And that already puts you on the left-wing spectrum of politics. It seems to me there are no parental figures in the right-wing anymore, people who would take care of NEETs like the roman emperors did. All you hear in the right-wing is "duty! responsibility!", they want you to be useful but they refuse to give anything to you. The right-wing since the last century or possibly even before that has been about social darwinism basically. They reward individuals who are already well-off, competent, strong and don't do anything for people who are useless.
>>292690>I just want a strong Father figure leader or a mommy state to take care of me and my basic needs without forcing me to work
Every single leftist regime had forced labor and viciously punished those who refused to work. You're being used. Psychopaths who want power at any cost are selling you this delusional fantasy that you'll be able to live a leisurely life as a pet to the new aristocracy after they take over. That's not how it works. Once they no longer need you you'll be lined up against a wall and shot.
>>292695>They reward individuals who are already well-off, competent, strong and don't do anything for people who are useless.
what makes you think NEETs are incompetent and useless? because they don't have a job?
Modern leftist thought is more ready to analyze working honestly. There are many "refusal of work" type leftists. On the other hand, right-wing intellectuals are still stuck in the medieval thought of you shall not eat if you won't work.
I think it is quite obvious which side cares more about NEETs. The left gives universal health care, free education, benefits, welfare, etc etc while the right is always against these things because they'd rather build more opera houses or whatever than to spend money on the people.
useless economically, ie not productive is what he means, i guess.
Most of us are that. Or we don't give a damn, we are just lazy.>useless
We are by definition useless. Worker drones are useful to the community. I'm not talking against the NEET life, I'm one myself. But objectively true that we don't contribute anything to society. Not that it is a bad thing, but let's be honest about it.
>>292700>right-wing intellectuals are still stuck in the medieval thought of you shall not eat if you won't work.
that's likely because you've never engaged with right-wing intellectual thought, which is why you're constantly confused when you encounter the anti-capitalist right
A universal refusal to work is absolutely unfeasible. Someone has to be growing and processing the food, someone has to be maintaining the infrastructure. You yourself even said in your original post>Right-wing wants people to be self-reliant, fuck that. Let me leech off on others' work and success.
This isn't an abolishment of work, it's the creation of a new literal slave class where you're the aristocracy who gets to lounge around all day.
>>292702>We are by definition useless. Worker drones are useful to the community. (…) But objectively true that we don't contribute anything to society.
why do you uncritically accept those criteria when you make that judgement? i don't accept anything that capitalism produces as useful or contributing to a community, by its nature it exploits communities and sells them useless trash
the left has not implemented a basic income. until i get paid a basic income and the left are responsible for it, you cannot say it is 'theirs'. but even in spite of that, you cant also weigh basic income over EVERYTHING ELSE and claim that makes me a leftist. politics barely gives a fuck about basic income atm it isn't some giga issue everyone solely defines their identity around
Society could have been reducing the need to work via automation and edging closer to a low-work utopia. Instead people are breeding so fast that food production can barely keep up despite enormous efficiency gains and people are working utterly useless jobs to produce trash like iphones and tiktoks.>>292702
Nobody can avoid affecting the world. We are all engaged in influencing the culture around us, with everything we buy, every shitpost we make, all government bux we consume, and how we affected every family member that supported us, etc. Japan is obviously affected in some way by the existence of hikikomori. Neet nerds are often ahead of the cultural curve: the first to make memes, the original gamers, the original anime consumers.
So how do you plan on deciding who has to work the fields and mine the coal and maintain and work all the factory equipment and who gets to be the new aristocracy class living off of the labor of the slave minority?
did he say he wanted a working governmental system or did he say he wanted to be taken care of like a child? just give up dude.
The "anti-capitalist right" means fascism and nazism or things along that line of thought. Like I said, spare me from your social darwinism. Thanks. I just want to NEET comfy mode. Fascism has never been NEET-friendly.>>292704
Lol So now it is considered aristocracy to demand basic things for myself like a place to live, money for paying the bills, food, clothes, internet and laptop? I don't exactly have high demands, you know. I don't want to eat luxury food or drive sport cars. I just want the state to give me money to survive and so I could continue NEET-ing. The state has plenty of money but somehow all of that has to be spent for "more important" things.>>292705
Well, I am useless. I don't want to work and all that. I acknowledge it. I don't need to feel superior about myself. I am a NEET because I like that lifestyle, not because I'm some genius artist.>>292706
I'm not talking about current political figures only. I meant that giving free stuff to people is a leftist idea generally, at least in current politics. Free health care, free education, etc all come from the left.>>292707
Having an effect on the world and being useful to it are different things. If you have something to be proud of then good for you. For me, I'm just a lazy guy. I'm not ashamed of it but it's good to be realistic.
>>292712>I'm not talking about current political figures only. I meant that giving free stuff to people is a leftist idea generally, at least in current politics. Free health care, free education, etc all come from the left.
how would you reconcile the free stuff won by unions with their historical stances on immigration and race? opposing the oversupply of foreign labor would be considered fascist today, and you would be called that both by liberals and libertarian conservitards
It sounds like you don't really have a coherent understanding of how government works.
You’re literally like me lol an eternal neet. I believe right wing neet wizards are just masochists that they wanna be gassed and end their misery.
they're middle class who are afraid they'll get screwed by big gubmint taking away their magical passive income, crypto gains or whatever they'll inherit once their boomer parents die
although i don't think many of them are actual neets
I'm not from the USA so I don't really know much about this. Migration and race issues, I'm right-wing about this, at least if we look at current politics. If migrants wanted to get into the USSR illegally they would have been shot like dogs without hesitation.>>292718
Maybe you just don't understand that the government likes to spend millions of money on retarded things instead of taking care of those people who would need it. There is money to finance festivals, "cultural" events, concerts, sport events but no money to give to NEETs? Governments don't spend enough money on NEETs.>>292748>>292749
Both of you are right, I think. Most "right-wing NEETs" are privileged people who inherit stuff from their parents or live from illegal activities. Or some are the self-hating type who just want to get gassed if that's what it takes for the white race to "prosper".
>>292750>fascism isn't right-wing
Then what is it? The 3rd way stuff nonsense usually refers to fascists trying to make their political ideology look as PC as possible. Fascism is the end of the right-wing spectrum, along with anarcho-capitalism. They are more similar than you would like to think, even if their motivations are different. Both have absolute disregard or even hatred for "leeches" or people who just want to be left alone to NEET. Both are social darwinism under the guise of political systems, both end up creating a society where strong and talented individuals get everything while those who don't have ambition or talent get treated like dirt.
I am all for mixing and trying out new political elements and methods but let's be clear about things. Fascism is right-wing extreme, no matter how you look at it.
fascism and other theories of government only call themselves third position not because they give a single fuck about being "muh PC" but because you and most retards soliciting their retarded political views cant get past the entry level language of politics.
it's all moot in the end anyway since nobody with power will take advice on how to govern from either normalfags or bulletin board redditors, but jesus fucking christ it is disgusting watching you tards talk past each other all the fucking time. get a fucking hobby lol.
Why does it bother you? Just ignore the politics thread like everyone else. Somehow you’re the only one that didn’t get the memo that internet politics will always be full retard.
all politics everywhere besides plutocratic conferences are full retard is my point. even on the ludicrously rare occasion someone manages to propose something intelligent and realistic, it will never get past brainstorming. i just really dont get how faggots talk about this bread and circus shit for years and are still stuck in the larval stage mentally. all political labels are worth less than dirt and governments only work for as long as leadership is compassionate and effective, and/or the working class deems them to be legitimate.
it's just not worth talking about period, but even more so if it's just an emotional outlet to attack others getting fucked in the ass just as much as the next guy.
it's like looking down a long expanse of highway with a semi hurtling toward a stalled car. you see the semi, the people in the car sees the semi, the semi driver sees the car for minutes beforehand and yet they still collide. it's watching a collective suicide in real-time.
starting farming co-ops and establishing parallel societies is just about the only avenue of non-violent protest that has any potential to work. do anything for independence from this diseased, dying system. any other kind that has "worked" in the past were merely either concessions the power structure was willing to make or playing right into their hand anyway.
yes, yes, waco and ruby ridge and all that jazz. i did only claim potential
and not try to sell it as a surefire solution, after all. the elephant in the room is that the vast majority of people need to die if anyone is to survive (for whatever that's worth). i really only disagree with depopulation jews on which groups should. certainly not some severely autistic hypochondriacs resting on their families' laurels and destroying everything while also building their own high-tech tombs. the folks running the world are literally insane. oh well, we all lost before we were born anyway.
Such is your frustration upon being unable to influence our points of view, even if center also exists at the political compass.
Thing is that polítics do not divide people more than they already are, they just put names to the extent of mankind collective morals and sociopsychology.
If you actually knew what you screech about, you'd know that not only fascism and alt-right are right wing, but also minarchists and ancaps are, being quite diferent compared to their autoritarian counterparts.
You have to be feeling such a empty life to actually desire death upon us because we didnt share your political views
Kick rocks, retard. You're on some real crab in the bucket shit by wasting your time categorizing your tribalisms. Instead of recognizing that, you just get butthurt like I stole your candy. Your labels are all bullshit and you're just plainly too fucking stupid to comprehend that. It's like speaking Chinese to a dog, trying to make you understand. I'm not the one that's killing you and neither is your long-dead fascist boogeyman.
Then have a nice time drowning in your own diarhea mindset about being a ragequit brainlet even when it comes to define simple cultural precepts
Pobly you are just another leftard psycho with permabutthurt due to being unable to convince people about fascism being the only thing at right wing, finally looking like a hardcore autist whenever you open that facehole to bait people
Hey, retard. Let me rephrase it yet again for you: politics is just as empty as any other form of semantics. There is no notable difference between capitalism, communism, fascism, feudalism, etc. You are arguing over what color you want the room to be painted. We don't need a million different words for the same fucking thing.
Hopefully you have put some time into hobbies, because you certainly haven't put much thought into something as dead-end as politics despite your stubborn inclinations. Me vomiting and shitting after a bender is more cerebral than anything you've ever said or thought on this subject. Have fun arguing about fairies while you're bled dry from the neck like the filthy, dumb cattle you are.
And whatever else you have the idiocy to add to such a foulness is ignored.
We schizos do not feel like processing data we don't care about.
It was so ignored that you felt compelled to respond with a post completely devoid of substance. Just letting me know I damaged your ass. Thanks, little guy.
Idem. You can keep on.
I'll get back to you when you actually have something to say. Feel free to claim the last word with more empty snark if it'll cheer you up, son.
Do you have actual autism? I'm serious here. Because you really come off as someone who is on *that* side of the spectrum, if you pardon my joke.
Or rather you are like a teenager who got into politics and thought it would change his life and the world. Then you got disillusioned and now you hate everything political.
Regardless of whether you can influence the world or not, talking about politics can be a fun way to pass the time. It's one of the oldest hobbies of mankind. Party-oriented politics is a waste of time for sure but the abstract, ideological debates are interesting.
>There is no notable difference between capitalism, communism, fascism, feudalism, etc. You are arguing over what color you want the room to be painted. We don't need a million different words for the same fucking thing.
Now, there-there, never go full retard, wizkid. You can't see the difference or pretend not to see any difference because these things confuse you and disturb you. Better just label everything as the same shit, huh? But politics matter and influence your and our lives completely. If there was a government that wanted to kill you or to take away your stuff would you still be so against engaging in politics? I think not. Just find a political system that matches your personality more or less.
Having so many terms for things that are functionally the exact same is just to create the illusion of reform. People are fickle and need to feel like there is some variety to their lives. Go from Emperor to Prime Minister, it doesn't matter. Nothing rarely changes behind the scenes, power usually doesn't even change hands and it doesn't make a significant difference when it does.
The common factor in any effective government is the good individual ruler who can maintain the legitimacy of the regime. Eventually the bad politicians erode all public support, government gets a name change, maybe the new regime fumbles immediately and dooms itself to a swift death, then another stable regime comes until it too dies, repeat forever. It doesn't matter what fancy, polysyllabic words you committed to paper in an attempt to make your ideology stand out from the others when humans have a very clear tendency to organize a certain way. The theory itself is completely worthless compared to what is observed in practice. Business executives are the modern kings or pack leaders. Agencies and armed forces are the knights or warriors. Coats of paint. Potato,
There is a lot of truth to the phrase "real communism hasn't been tried," but that's because it cannot suit instinctual human proclivities in regards to social structure. Even if it could achieve anarchy, these organizations would inevitably come back around.
Also, if I were a potential threat to the power structure, I would probably get wetted. If I'm not, then it doesn't matter how I feel when it fucks me over. For better or worse, the majority already has zero political agency even in democracy.
The creepy point of actually thinking that still his garbage is to be attended as if worthy of it by losing time making it longer…>>292784
Even if commie scam was ever tried again it would still be a sign of catastrophic idiocy. Please stop falling for the bait
You're still butthurt enough to immediately latch onto whoever offers some actual arguments (unlike you) and vigorously jerk him off? Pretty sad, actually, but you are a perpetual crab I guess. No one is getting out of the bucket, but that doesn't mean you have to get off on it. Very Reddit behavior to encourage a dogpile.
lol maybe respond to the actual arguments instead of continuing with your impotent attempts to gaslight this guy.
Already did, fucking dweeb. Lol.
>>292784>that's because it cannot suit instinctual human proclivities in regards to social structure
really? kids come out of the womb wanting to follow orders and listen to authority figures? cause back on earth kids go through a rigorous brainwashing program to be able to tolerate that sort of shit.
>>292795>youth rebellion is meaningful by any stretch of the imagination
You're right, scratching penises into the bathroom stall at school is a profound protest.
save yourself the keystrokes and just fuck off next time you want to write a harebrained strawman like that. literally 0 people who understood my point will have their opinions swayed by your post.
No, no, you're totally right. Changing your profile picture to Che Guevara smoking a blunt and tweeting a short blurb from Das Kapital
are some brave ways to really stick it to society. I'm in awe of your rhetorical skillz. You certainly don't need to clarify your argument with anything new and just boast about how correct you are. Again with popular appeals. Convincing stuff on a board for recluses.
*listens to pop top 40s*
*buys new iphone and sneakers every year*
*shares most intimate life details through discord*
*transitions with blessing of parents*
*only pays attention to politics when presidential election rolls around but overjoyed so long as a democrat wins*
¡Viva la revolución!
>>292798>No, no, you're totally right
i couldnt possibly take the win from you here, the way you so elegantly dismissed my points just made me want to leave the second you opened your mouth. youre so repulsive youve left me no choice but to leave the debate in shame.
It's your choice not to clarify your arguments and crying that I'm not talking to you like a baby doesn't matter to the conversation. I'm not your daddy, boy. You don't see me whining when you fags get a couple jabs in yourselves.
But hey, if you spend your time doing anything besides talking about politics then I can say I'm getting what I want out of it. I know you will come back to it when I get bored, but it's just really funny how supremely butthurt you get for telling you to have a little more respect for your time. Hell, even giving a shit about GMO niggers being overpaid to play kids ballgames isn't as pathetic as arguing over politics.
>>292801>It's your choice not to clarify your arguments
my argument is hidden behind precisely one layer of sarcasm, im sure you can figure it out without me talking to you like a baby. and yeah i suppose i am supposed to know that you strawmanning my argument really just means you want clarification, dont worry, it wont happen again princess.
>it's just really funny how supremely butthurt you get for telling you to have a little more respect for your time
i dont care about what you were talking about before you talked to me, if i did i wouldve responded to what you said on that subject.
You can say that I am strawmanning you all you want, but you're still choosing not to clarify your position and so I'm left to assume that I correctly interpreted what you were trying to say. I profusely apologize that I am not a mind-reader. I can only respond to what you write to me.
So, what can you say of youth rebellion that you think is having some meaningful impact on the power structure?
you said, that anarchy runs against human nature, and that this is why it cannot work. in contrast to your implied position that having a government is more aligned with human nature, i then brought up how children are known to rebel against authority figures, to which you said "children do not accomplish anything through their acts of rebellion and furthermore it is a meaningless phenomenon."
>So, what can you say of youth rebellion that you think is having some meaningful impact on the power structure?
since thats not actually what ive been trying to discuss, i dont care. it certainly seems like you want me to take a position against you on this but alas none of my posts indicate any interest on this subject.
Well, yes, I think I did address your point then. Anarchy clearly does
run counter to human nature and I don't see what about kids being mildly angsty somehow indicates that these systems of government like anarchism and communism better suit human temperaments. Even kids establish pecking orders. The "rebellious" phase where they steal beer and cigarettes from their parents, and sing along to Fuck Tha Police
, is a very short-lived and superficial one. Kids almost never get more politically involved past regurgitating mass media programming (and I would consider parroting commentators such as Contra Points or Nick Fuentes not to be a far cry from watching CNN, FOX, MSNBC and so forth) and complaining that weed is a plant and shouldn't be illegal.
My brother had recounted when Biden got elected how all his lefty-type friends were genuinely happy despite the fact that, in the most charitable light possible, American Democrats pursue the most shallow imitations of socialism possible. I don't personally care who gets elected, but I just wouldn't say this group truly embodies the ideology they are pretending to pay lip service toward. In fact, I think the progressive tendency of youth betrays that they are inclined toward conformity. Maybe younger generations express a slightly more pronounced will, but they overall still conform to the society where it counts.
I'm not sure why you think my previous prompt is off-topic. By power structure, I mean: the society, current social paradigm, establishment, institution, etc. Kids aren't going off Lord of the Flies
-style and establishing their own lasting cultures (which ends up with its own leaders and outcasts of course, but it's all fiction anyway).
the fact that children disobey authority figures even with overwhelming environmental pressures to obey authority figures shows that it is strongly in human nature to not be ruled by authorities. if it were in human nature to trust and respect authority, then with the external and internal pressures combined it would make disobedience to authority something rare. children do not innately think "i should respect this person because theyre authority", infact they dont even start off conceiving people as authoritative because the concept is made up, its perpetuated entirely by people moving their mouths.
>The "rebellious" phase is a very short-lived and superficial one
conformity ultimately does win out in the end i agree, but that doesnt mean anything regarding the innate qualities humans tend to. children are taught to obey authority figures without question, they take orders for the first 18 years of their lives. this acclimatizes them to living under an authoritarian government (and those are all governments by the way), if instead they had an upbringing that got them ready to live in an anarchistic world, they would be able to live in an anarchistic world.
>I'm not sure why you think my previous prompt is off-topic
were talking about the exactitudes of human nature, not the effects of youthful rebellion. although i would add that human history lines up with my view of human nature. since it is in human nature to be free we have been getting closer to freedom over time. humanity never has been free, but what we have now is better than bowing down to the king.
I think kids generally only perform soft-rebellion as a sort of shit-test, like seeing if the alpha dog or lion or chimp is too old to defend his throne. I think it's less of a desire for reform and more one of wanting to assume authority.>(and those are all governments by the way)
I don't disagree with this at all. I know you said you don't care about the previous arguments, but I just wanted to reiterate that I think each individual rulers' decisions matter much more to the longevity and success of a regime rather than what principles the government espouses at the time. Acta non verba and all that.>if instead they had an upbringing that got them ready to live in an anarchistic world
Other primates and other distinct species organize harems and societies. Some form of social structure predates humanity and that's all the more reason I consider it the default state of humanity.>since it is in human nature to be free we have been getting closer to freedom over time
Are we, though? I'd argue that power is more consolidated and government violates our privacies more than ever. Sure, in some contexts a monarchy could be considered worse with its far less nuanced approach to class. Maybe a king mismanages the kingdom, fails to organize his troop to properly defend his serfs and still demands tribute out of them when they cannot afford to grant it to him. However, are we really moving away from this or is this same process merely becoming more abstracted? Family ownership of business has dwindled an alarming amount within the past two centuries. Many groups that have made moves toward self-sufficiency have been co-opted or blatantly destroyed by facets of the power structure. If you see economic independence as the root of all freedom, then I would say the average person has only lost ground within our lifetimes. Those are increasingly rare exceptions in themselves, too, as younger generations are trained to view anything resembling this topic as sheer unhinged schizophrenic tongues.
As another bit of digression, I recommend looking into gardening if you haven't yet. It might look a bit daunting and expensive, but it's really not. If you are a homebody, it can be quite easy to adopt. You can find guides on how to raise potatoes within a small apartment, even. Other plants can easily be grown in small quantities upon window sills. I strongly feel that pursuing hobbies that help divorce you from your dependence on society help pave the way to more relative freedom than what I believe we are actually being granted from the power structure (despite how much they love to claim they value freedom). At the very least, it's currently very improbable that the government will come for your potatoes nor force you to eat their own.
>>292811>I'd argue that power is more consolidated and government violates our privacies more than ever
power is more consolidated than ever but the resistance against it is also stronger than ever, even if only a tiny minority of society. a thousand years ago you would be killed for not bowing before the king, now you can publish books and tell people on the internet why the government shouldnt exist. superficially it looks like weve just remained enslaved for all of history but really the battle has just slowly been turning in the favor of freedom, and maybe accelerating too. i recommend reading "the end of all evil" because this is basically where im pulling this from.
>If you see economic independence as the root of all freedom, then I would say the average person has only lost ground within our lifetimes
i dont, i see morality as the root of all freedom. "do unto others as you would have done to yourself" if you want the short version. if you want the long version, do not initiate violence against others and do not let others initiate violence against you (or others). i also get what youre saying about economic freedom, its important but its not the reason why we arent free. and on the bright side, these fractional reserve banking tricks only work for so long, it will only take so many years before people will never accept the idea ever again, like monarchy.
>I think it's less of a desire for reform and more one of wanting to assume authority
authority over oneself, yes, over the one imposing authority? i dont think so. most acts of rebellion are because the child has a genuine belief or need or whatever that an authority figure just doesnt care about, and so the child acts independently of what the authority figure wants or disrespects the authority figure.
>I just wanted to reiterate that I think each individual rulers' decisions matter much more to the longevity and success of a regime rather than what principles the government espouses at the time
i am against government on principle, it doesnt matter who is on the throne or what policies a government has, its a government.
>Some form of social structure predates humanity and that's all the more reason I consider it the default state of humanity
if there is any social structure inherent to humanity, its the familial structure. biologically people are predisposed to like and trust their parents so thats how tribes work, the elders make the decisions. but thats where it ends, the family, thats the full extent of programmed human social structure. there is no programming for respecting the king and his knights and no programming for interacting with strangers, how we act to those outside our family is completely unbiased by biology.
The debate about what is in accordance with human nature is pointless. There is no universal human nature. Everyone sees in humanity his own self reflected only, ignoring other tendencies. Humans aren't cattle who need leaders and they aren't independent freedom fighters either. Because universal human nature doesn't exist. Different people behave in different ways and react differently to things. One could even imagine a communist or anarchist society that stays true to its principles and establishes equality and freedom for all. If you are using this site then you acknowledge that human lives can vary greatly from person to person.>>292784>>292786
You just have a problem with your "mental" eyesight. It's like calling all people the same because we share some common things like eating, sleeping, etc. Surely there are similarities between all systems of government on some level but there are more differences overall. If what you are saying is true then there wouldn't be wars and revolutions at all. I know you will respond to this with "wars are fought for selfish reasons only" but I will say this again: you are oversimplifying things. Ideals and ideologies do matter. If all system is the same then would you be all right living in Nazi Germany? Or in North Korea? Do you see the difference between these examples and let's say, current day Sweden? You are deluded if you think everything is the same. If anything, there aren't two governments that are the same, ever.
It's not about having control, you as an ordinary man are always the subject of some ruler. But what are the ruler's principles and ideals? Along what lines he governs his state? That is an important matter.
What do you think about minarchy?
I mean, since anarchy means no goverment at all…
it's hard to imagine other systems of governmenng when you have only experienced the american wasteland. i've read about all types but i can't actually imagine them working. i feel like you can't plan for this stuff after a certain point and you are trapped in the current system. i've also thought that perhaps the best thing you could do, if you had power, would be to remove as many rules as possible. because it seems like no matter what system of government you want, there is a jungle of weeds preventing impactful changes from occurring, everything feels needlessly bogged down
For me it doesn't do much since I am the authoritarian type. Give me NEETbux and a strong state that can do justice and uphold the peace and silence well and I won't complain. I would be positioned on the authoritarian-left side of the spectrum but like I said, if it is some kind of non-fascist, non-capitalist kind of right-wing authoritarian system which takes care of me and isn't completely retarded then I'm okay with that too. For example, absolute monarchy or aristocracy of some kind or some religious society. In some rich muslim countries for example if I remember right people get something like universal basic income so you can NEET all you want and don't have to work.
I want the option to live a contemplative hermit life to be there for me. I don't want to live in a monastery so yes, NEETbux is what I care about. And about being authoritarian, I witnessed many stupid shit in the democracy I live in to know that the government should use an iron fist sometimes to prevent serious damage done to society and culture. Retarded things like treating criminals who aren't 18 yet with "humanity" and "compassion" lead to disaster usually, for example. Teachers should also possess the right to discipline students that aren't behaving well imo, I remember annoying normals making school so hard and unbearable for those of us that wanted to learn actually. And I could go on, with media being full of degenerate stuff like overly sexual content for no reason and promoting destructive values to the people. Things need to be censured in a healthy society. You need to weed out the trash from acceptable or high value stuff otherwise your society will become toxic. You need to set some values above others, otherwise it will be just some chaotic mess where every idiot's opinion weighs the same as the opinion of smart, cultured or well-meaning people.
Why do you trust normalfags to wield this sort of power over you? The sort of people who rise to the top in authoritarian regimes are not the kind of people who have sympathy towards lazy neets who want to do nothing all day.
And why do you people trust in humanity and in your abilities to be able to live a comfy life in a world where everything is about competition in one way or another? I don't trust people, that is exactly why I'm pro-authority. Liberals, anarchists or democrats are naive people who refuse to understand that people are trash, at least the vast majority of them are. A NEET-friendly authoritarian regime is more realistic than some kind of anarchy or liberalism where people will just "leave each other alone". I refuse to accept a world where my opinion and the opinion of the cattle weighs equally in grand scale. I know I belong to an extreme minority of people and so I fight against every ideology that wants to liberate the stupid masses of normalfags. They have enough power and say in things as things stand, God almighty, what would happen if they got EVEN MORE rights?
Wiz-friendly dictatorship is the way to go. A strong authority figure that scares normals and forces them to behave themselves. Liberalism, anarchism and the such are cattle ideologies.
And what happens when the despot who's ruthless and politically adept enough to climb to the top of the authoritarian hierarchy decides that it's not in his best interest to be "NEET-friendly"? What's your recourse? Are you going to complain on the internet? Try a protest? Enjoy getting beat within an inch of your life and imprisoned indefinitely. There's a reason why there has never been a "NEET-friendly" authoritarian regime. There is absolutely zero reason why a dictator would choose to be "wiz-friendly".
Roman emperors were quite NEET-friendly if you ask me. They distributed money and resources among those who didn't want to work. It's not hard to imagine a kingdom where the ruler takes care of people who don't have anything. This "Fuck it, nobody owes anyone anything" attitude is quite a recent phenomenon. In the past leaders and rulers were more responsible and caring about their subjects than nowadays.
It's all a matter of what ideology the "despot" or the system itself is built on. Besides, having a big welfare state that takes care of people is good for everyone. It will reduce crime rates and people won't complain or revolt. It is a win-win situation.
Your opinion of how the system should be built means absolutely nothing in an authoritarian regime though since you're just property of the state.
>>292851>I don't trust people, that is exactly why I'm pro-authority
i agree, everything got better when we let the penguins rule us instead of those stupid humans.
You make the mistake of assuming I'm talking in defense of all kinds of authoritarian regimes. I'm not. I'm talking about my ideas and ideologies which would matter absolutely everything if someone one day decided to build a society based on them or along these lines.>>292864
It is like this: you can trust ALL of society to make responsible decisions and to live virtuously (herd ideologies like democracy, anarchism or liberalism)…or you can decide to place your trust in 0.001% of society who will take leadership. I'll let you decide what is more realistic and sensible.
>>292865>you can trust ALL of society to make responsible decisions and to live virtuously
you can trust people, i will trust my gun. and it is also your responsibility to educate people about morality (and mine). were not simply going to get rid of the government and persist in the childish mentality of having mommy and daddy government take care of us and sort out every dispute.
>herd ideologies like democracy, anarchism or liberalism
funny, you want a government to act like a shepherd taking care of people like cattle and i have the "herd ideology". i am not the one who sees humans as farm animals.
>or you can decide to place your trust in 0.001% of society who will take leadership
oh yeah, the same people who killed over 260 million civilians in the 20th century, the same people who perform terrorist attacks on "their" people to justify wars, the same people who have stolen more than all criminals of all time combined, why wouldnt i trust them? theyre only the people who most viciously fight to maintain the power to treat others like cattle, they must be the most moral and righteous people of our society.
in the end the real choice is between governing yourself and being governed by others, that is the only real question there is in politics. are you going to be responsible for your own safety or do you trust someone else to keep you safe? which is more realistic and sensible?
>>292865>or you can decide to place your trust in 0.001% of society who will take leadership
Even if they're acting in direct opposition to your idea of a perfect authoritarian social order? I hope you realize that powerful and influence politicians who share your vision of how society should be ordered are extremely rare to nonexistence. When you campaign for authoritarianism in the current political zeitgeist you are lobbying for a social order that exists in direct opposition to your utopian ideal, even if the leaders are as despotic as you prefer.
You are delusional if you place your trust in your gun and yourself. Have fun getting raped by packs of normals in your dystopia. There is a very serious reason violence is seen as a no-no in civilized societies, well hopefully you will realize it too when there won't be a police out there protecting you from the scum of society.
>why wouldnt i trust them?
Okay then, don't call an ambulance or doctors the next time you are bleeding to death on the street. In fact, don't give a call to the police too even if you or family is in danger. And don't bother with legal procedures at all, go be a tough ape alpha guy and solve all your problems on your own. I'm sure it is a great plan…
>funny, you want a government to act like a shepherd taking care of people like cattle and i have the "herd ideology". i am not the one who sees humans as farm animals.
If the cattle rules, like in your little dystopia, then it is a herd ideology. If there are some people who are more intelligent than the mass of retards and they run things then we can have something nice, like actual culture and civilization.
A couple of bad examples and tyrants don't take away the truth that people can only co-exist in a civilized manner if someone is lord, judge and executioner over them.>>292868
You are right, politicians who share my visions are rare. Because most politicians are in it for the money or status simply these days. They don't know about honor, duty to one's people, dignity, loyalty, etc. I am waiting for the ÜberNEET to appear. He is yet to be born, our Messiah and Savior. But I have faith in my ideals. Regardless of whether or not someone decides to actually create a society based on my values one day or not is irrelevant. Regardless, this is the correct way to do things. This is my dream and ideal.
I find it funny you say violence is a no no then talk about the police, who's chief tool is violence.
>Americans pay chinese to take their garbage>Chinese dump it in the ocean >Americans and Europeans pay to clean it up
They get paid to be violent in order to oppress violence in general. So that you and me and others can sleep peacefully. Again, I would rather live in a society where only a minority (law enforcement) uses violence than to live in a society where EVERYONE lives violently.
Modernists and pro-equal rights people like you like to question everything and every tradition but there is a reason these things developed and became common parts of societies: law enforcement, judges, a minority of leaders who direct things, etc. Without these living together becomes impossible or literal hell.
>>292886>They get paid to be violent in order to oppress violence in general.
*kneels briefly in front of burning precinct*
Cucks like you deserve a shotgun to the face
>>292875>A couple of bad examples and tyrants don't take away the truth that people can only co-exist in a civilized manner if someone is lord, judge and executioner over them
so if the government disappeared tomorrow you would start cannibalizing the closest person to you and breaking everything in your vicinity? no? please name anyone you know who would do that then (hard mode: you cant name any boogeymen, i.e. niggers).
another example of how retarded and brainwashed you are is imagining a scenario of people crash landed on a deserted island. in your feeble mind you imagine the survivors of the crash instantly lunging at each other and fighting to the death, leaving everyone dead in a matter of hours. however in reality, since most people do not want to fight to the death and be in perpetual fear, they get along. in fact people are so scared of having to deal with violence that they cling to infantile ideologies like authoritarianism (the most prevalent ideology in the world).
>Have fun getting raped by packs of normals in your dystopia
the amount of people that want to rape people is greatly outnumbered by the amount of people who are against rape. eventually a group of rapists would be killed because i imagine they would make people mad enough to do something. they could get the drop on you and rape you, but they could do the same in a society with police so the argument is meaningless.
>Okay then, don't call an ambulance or doctors the next time you are bleeding to death on the street
those arent the people i was talking about not trusting, but sure, be a slimy kike if it makes you feel better. not to mention the fact that private healthcare is a thing and we have seen it work in the real world.
>In fact, don't give a call to the police too even if you or family is in danger
theres nothing special about the police, if im in danger all i need is more good guys with guns.
>And don't bother with legal procedures at all
legal procedures are great, they keep things civil, but keep imagining things for me to believe i guess.
>If the cattle rules, like in your little dystopia, then it is a herd ideology
no one rules anyone except themselves, and they are people, not cattle. they will be armed and dangerous, make decisions on their own, and bow to no one, very dissimilar to a farm animal. and you know what, i dont even think authoritarianism can be accurately called a herd ideology, its much more akin to a boyfriend ideology. wanting to be dominated and fucked by big daddy government with taxes and laws, but also made to feel safe by his big muscles, the police force. and just like a bipolar succubus, getting into relationship after relationship with abusive boyfriends (governments) and thinking the next one is going to be any different.
>I am waiting for the ÜberNEET>this is the correct way to do things
yes, hoping that the next guy you put on the throne isnt a genocidal maniac is definitely the correct way to go about this. nevermind the fact that you have no idea how to assure that a good guy becomes the dictator, youre just going to hope.
In a healthy society that is what the police does. In Western societies you can witness what liberalism and equal rights, human rights does to order and safety of the society. The police in Europe and in the US is afraid of doing their jobs because they will get fired the minute they get even a little forceful or rough. Pathetic.>>292890
Did I upset you, my freedom loving friend? It is so mainstream to be for freedom and anarchy these days. You aren't original at all.>>292892
You aren't worth the discussion since you prove your stupidity by believing in retarded things like "humans are inherently good". Nobody above the age of 10 believes in things like this. It is most likely because you are a normalfag with friends and a huge social circle and you need to delude yourself to believe that the majority of humans are good, responsible people. Yes, if people could get away with it, they would be assholes. I know it is surprising to you but that is how it is. Not just niggers, everyone. The minute they feel comfortable and safe, people start seeking out those they can take advantage of. Of course you in your privileged middle class suburban neighborhood wouldn't know about this, growing up around middle class or rich people who have everything and more than they want. So I'll excuses your delusions about this subject, bourgeoisie-fag.
>eventually a group of rapists would be killed
Boy, you are sure taking this to new levels. Now you go on to "just world fallacy" crap. The world doesn't work like you'd imagine it does based on your anime and movies. Also, are you sure about rapist being outnumbered by those who are against it? Maybe in a community most men say so but secretly they fantasize about it, why do you think during wars (which are closest to the anarchy or minimal government world you want) mass rapes always occur? It sure sounds like you live among the clouds and not here on Earth with the rest of us.
Only works if you are privileged enough, like you probably are.
>if im in danger all i need is more good guys with guns
I'm sure they would be willing to sacrifice themselves to save your ass, you bet. When compared to cops who make a living on dealing with these things, you can't trust ordinary citizens to help you. Besides you contradict yourself. You said above that most people hate violence and avoid it at all costs…so now what is it? They avoid violence or they are ready to engage in it for the greater good? (LOL)
>no one rules anyone except themselves, and they are people, not cattle. they will be armed and dangerous, make decisions on their own, and bow to no one, very dissimilar to a farm animal.
Lol again, yeah because the average man tends to think for himself, oh yes. That is why we have influencers and reality show figures and social media whores telling the majority what to think about things. Grow up, any time now…Your world would end in the majority ruling everything and making life unbearable for outsiders like us on this site. Guess it doesn't bother you much since you are a norm either way.
Yeah continue to play the "rebel", rebel against everyone and everything because that is the current normalfag trend and ideology. You fit right in with the cattle.
>>292420>THEY BEGIN TO GET BETTER
Expect they wont, so never ever.
It will only will get worse.
Spare us of your collectivistic drivel.
You mean spare you from the discussion of the collective and society you yourself are a part of? Why would anyone care about society and the collective? Hmmm…Maybe because it has a huge effect on our day to day lives individually?
crabs won't even let you sit near them andour
I've even read some wizards type our
i remember my anarchism phase as a teenager, i just didn't want myself to be ruled over, and that is a completely normal and healthy view coming from a bad household. i didn't really consider how society as a whole could function. giving it some thought, i don't think it ever would work large scale.
..but small scale and individually, it seems possible, most small gatherings of people seem anarchic with no clear person dictating how others behave, and for these small groups i get the impression it is quite enjoyable. there are few enough people in the group, you are able to behave respectfully and that is sufficient to maintain order.
it's when groups become large that there needs to be some clear source of authority. society seems to distribute this authority hierarchically so the rulers at the top don't have to do all the work, they delegate downwards. you have land owners who have authority over their property. and then towns have authority over all their land. counties over the towns, then states, etc. a clear hierarchy.
it seems each level of the hierarchy needs a certain amount of autonomy, or authority to act for itself, to function best. when it cannot function, bad results follow. but each level seems to act against the levels above it. like individual homeowners doing electrical and construction work themselves and rejecting building codes. or states choosing to not enforce federal laws. you can probably understand a lot of types of government by looking the autonomy of each level, and maybe even work from the reverse to figure out the government by learning how each level is able to act for itself. maybe the county and state levels aren't strong enough. maybe the federal level is too strong. maybe homeowners and individuals don't have enough authority, it sure seems that way to me.
>>292902>you prove your stupidity by believing in retarded things like "humans are inherently good"
>if people could get away with it, they would be assholes>The minute they feel comfortable and safe, people start seeking out those they can take advantage of
thats why weapons exist, did you forget about those? really feels like im talking to a toddler
>Now you go on to "just world fallacy" crap
it has nothing to do with morality, if you go around raping people enough of your victims are going to get mad enough to seek revenge. are you trying to contend that a group of rapists would be able to rape anyone they wanted with no recourse at all?
>why do you think during wars (which are closest to the anarchy or minimal government world you want) mass rapes always occur?
yeah, nothing says "anarchy" like a couple thousand government mercenaries trying to kill an opposing army and subjugate a population.
>I'm sure they would be willing to sacrifice themselves to save your ass, you bet
oh and cops just charge into the scene and save the day right? just like in the movies?
>Lol again, yeah because the average man tends to think for himself, oh yes
hes capable of it, you want him to be forced into the role of a farm animal, i want him to be more than that.
>Your world would end in the majority ruling everything and making life unbearable for outsiders like us on this site
no, that would be archy, i want anarchy. the prefix "an" means absence, "archy" (short for archon) means ruler or rulers. if people believe in rulership and authority, there will be rulers, and that will inevitably end up in the form of a government. so you are correct on one thing, if the government disappeared tomorrow we would only end up with another government.
You do believe humans are inherently good if you think people can get along peacefully without a strong authority figure watching over them.>weapons
Haha, what do they matter? Are you implying only moral and good people can use guns? You are very funny.>it has nothing to do with morality, if you go around raping people enough of your victims are going to get mad enough to seek revenge. are you trying to contend that a group of rapists would be able to rape anyone they wanted with no recourse at all?
Yes, good old "just world" fallacy, evil men always get their due punishment in the end, right? Oh wait, they don't. Rapists usually tend to kill their victims too so that they can't tell anyone. What then? Who will search for the rapist killers without the police? inb4 Me and my buddies will serve justice…Lol Rednecks going around with guns killing weird or autist wizards because we would get blamed for everything in a world like that…such a good idea!>yeah, nothing says "anarchy" like a couple thousand government mercenaries trying to kill an opposing army and subjugate a population.
That is what is closest to anarchy. So in anarchy it wouldn't be armies vs armies but gangs vs gangs and person vs person. Big difference.>oh and cops just charge into the scene and save the day right? just like in the movies?
Not always but 99% of the time they have to clean up the shit or prevent it from spreading elsewhere. Still much more trustworthy than the idea of citizens upholding the law and order themselves.>hes capable of it
No, he isn't. He only follows what he is told to do and thinks what he is encourage to think. You have a childish view of humanity, anyone told you before?
Anarchy doesn't work big scale. It may work in isolated small groups, like with 10 people going off to form a commune somewhere. But only as long as all members agree on everything, the minute someone will have a different opinion and such it will collapse marvelously. In the end, the average normalfag doesn't deserve any freedumbs or rights. You don't want to trust your fate to these apes, trust me.
>>293013>You do believe humans are inherently good
no i dont, you can go back and read my posts if you want further clarification.
>Haha, what do they matter? Are you implying only moral and good people can use guns?
you said if people feel comfortable then theyre going to do whatever heinous crime they feel like. if everyone has a weapon then people will not feel comfortable committing heinous crimes. what do you gain from being so willfully retarded?
>Yes, good old "just world" fallacy, evil men always get their due punishment in the end, right?
nope, it would be the same as going up to people and eating pork in saudi arabia, eventually youre going to get shot or thrown in jail.
>Rapists usually tend to kill their victims too so that they can't tell anyone
>Who will search for the rapist killers without the police?
who ever cares enough to do it, and maybe youll even have to pay someone to do it instead of paying cops with other peoples money.
>That is what is closest to anarchy. So in anarchy it wouldn't be armies vs armies but gangs vs gangs and person vs person.
see my last post for the definition of anarchy
>Still much more trustworthy than the idea of citizens upholding the law and order themselves
and what is the magical difference between a human and a human in a uniform?
>He only follows what he is told to do and thinks what he is encourage to think
that has nothing to do with the capacity to think for yourself. what the fuck do you think would happen if no one else was around? would people be completely incapable of thinking?
>Anarchy doesn't work big scale
thats a bold claim for someone who didnt know the definition of anarchy up until 5 seconds ago (and still refuses to understand it).
>In the end, the average normalfag doesn't deserve any freedumbs or rights
so what qualifies someone for having rights? an autism diagnosis?
I miss Trump so much. That guy was a meme god and made the world entertaining. He would've united the planet if people didn't get so butthurt over the way he spoke
The way he spoke is what won him the presidency.
Kill yourself for posting reddit screencap bait.
crabs watch one yuri besminov video, suddenly they are ex kgb with level 5 clearance too lol word by word
I was born and raised in Los Angeles. It is indeed a shithole. Though I’m going to Berlin for the first time, so I’m excited to see if Europe really is better or if it’s just faggots blowing steam out their asses.
>>293426>When his cities are filled with trash, crime and hopelessness, only then will he understand
No, they'll never accept it. No matter how far they're pushed. They can't. Even if their masters literally lined them up and shot them in the head one by one they'll continue defending them up until they die. These people have passed the point of being slaves, they've become thralls. Their will simply doesn't exist anymore. Saving them is impossible.
Been laughing about his dead daughter for a couple days now. Just desserts.
Because you're an idiot kike lover
You're brainless if you think either Russia isn't full of jewish influence and/or that it's a pro-white nation. Keep being a butthurt contrarian retard falling for the flipside of propaganda. Faggot genocide-advocate of international renown going catatonic when his own seed faces the consequences of his empty pomp is hilarious.
Why not just use representatives within a direct democracy? As in, each citizen can either vote directly or appoint a representative to vote on their behalf. Then people who want to be more involved can vote directly, those who are too busy to can let someone they trust vote for them. If representatives turn out to be corrupt then their constituents can immediately switch to another, rather than needing to wait for a reelection and hope that a good candidate is even on the ballot.
I know there are other arguments against direct democracy. One is tyranny of the majority. This could be solved by allowing secession at will, so jurisdictions which don't feel represented can break off to join another state, or form a new one.
Then the argument that people will vote against their own interests due to ignorance or being fooled by a demagogue. I don't see how it could possibly be worse than the current representative republics (which are just crypto-plutocracies), and I think because policy iteration would be so quick in this kind of system that even if the citizens are fools, through trial and error, poor policies would be quickly dispelled and eventually only the ones that work well would remain.
Though it would definitely be a mess on a national scale. Due to the great diversity of opinion inherit in most nations, it would probably result in nothing getting done at the national level. Most nations would probably either balkanize or turn into loose federations which decide only very broad matters. Which would be wonderful. The only better system I could imagine would be a true enlightened monarchy. Even then, due to the complexity of affairs it would still be best to have direct democracy within the more basic jurisdictions.
thats what most want to do, and why not? just grill some chicken, steaks and wieners. more internet integrated into more small corners everyday. bombard as much of the populace as possible with this faggot propaganda bullshit!!! that's exactly why i say stop giving a singular fucking shit about politics. it's a trap!!!!!!! run away NOW, sooner than later. none of us can win at it, it's the dumbest game one can play.
Interesting. This clipart is exactly how I draw and how I do "perspective", except I can't color like that since I have no idea how you decide where shadows go.
Yeah but he isn't sad about it. He is a crazy mystic, he has mystic traditional child sacrifice content on his website including a case of a father sacrificing his daughter's lifehttp://arcto.ru/article/1655
FSB killed her as a maidenly sacrifice to escalate the war, killing an old man wouldn't have had the same effect. The FSB's response has also been really incompetent and full of holes. They picked the month of August because Russia and russian government have superstitions about the month of august and bad things happening, so to them its like they are taking the initiative or energy first, its not rational but thinking they are rational is a western fault where you're thinking like a western politician.
Lastly she was getting out of hand, criticising the Russian military and standing out and posing herself as some future minister for defense or national politician, doing lots of networking and posing a threat, something you don't do in Russia.
Expect the war to escalate in a few days.
>le happy child sacrifice face
He is like the far right's globalist sacrificing to Moloch but actual, I mean that is all Russia is, everything they ever bitch about the U.S doing is usually far worse over there, Putin has been doing FSb false flags since he bombed some apartment building that conveniently built his career
Aleksandr Dugin publishes a statement, literally saying Dugina was "put her succubus virgin's life onto the altar" (девичья is literally "succubus virgins's"), and in his speech at her funeral calls "not to mourn but fight":
Dugin is nuts and he isn't even that influential in Russia he just gets overhyped by westerners and journalists because he has a cool beard and mythical wizard look, if he was a crab looking he wouldn't even be known in the west
"She had no fear," said Dugin. "The last words she said during our conversation at the Tradition festival were 'father, I feel like a warrior, I feel like a hero. I want to be one, I don't want any different fate. I want to be with my people, with my country. I want to be on the side of the forces of light. That's the most important thing,'" he said.
but apparently its mostly aimed outside of russia, at western coomers, because russian males don't give a shit about some maiden dying since their country is more female anyway so they don't have a crab mindset. They need an excuse to do some barbaric things.
is that the actual body?
I thought he pissed himself and got hospitalized from shock at her death.
>And what this machine will not accept is compromise. If I censored specific kinds of behavior, it would not matter. They don't want a specific thing censored. They want the average person to be able to speak in channels where only specific thoughts are acceptable.
>More importantly, they want to make it so that no small organization can host a service which threatens the cathedral. It used to be that one guy with a good idea could open a platform and be a Tom Anderson, Mark Zuckerberg, Tom Fulp, Christopher Poole, or Richard Kyanka. Take note these names are all from 10+ years ago. There are no new groundbreakers online anymore because breaking ground in the new Internet's corporate parking lot is not allowed.
Holy shit, didn't I say it, didn't other anons say it? That trannies (and mass shooters) are a psyops on the last group of people they couldn't break through regular social conventions? The last people capable of revolutionary thought until they were lead down a path of faggotry?
Kiwifarms is down.
Yes, it is. It's the way they were shut down. If any website is accused of wrongthink and poses "imminent danger" to a person they can shut it down.
Couldn't care less of a shit that a site of crabs that finds enjoyment in stalking and harassing anyone they deem a weirdo got dumped because the retarded crabs on the site messed with the money of the corporation they were being protected by.
Cloudflare hosted terrorist websites and a gossip site gets shut down?>>293907>>293908
You understand that wizchan is not immune to being shut down for wrongthink right?
Or are you in the in the middle of transitioning?
Not sure if you can see the bigger picture.
They doxxed cloudflare customers who spoke out against them (how ironic) and were surprised to find out that cloudflare executives don't take kindly to their money flow being messed with. They bit the hand feeding them and got what they deserved. They could've kept their operation of monitoring and fucking with whatever trans or autist they found online, but that's how normalfucks are when they go so long without getting decked in the face. They start to believe they're above everyone until a bigger fish knocks them back to reality. It's laughable to me how any wizard would be upset about it getting fucked over. Especially considering this place used to be one of their targets years ago.>>293910
The website so crabs can feel better about themselves by looking in the mirror is not doing anything for your retarded normalfuck culture war, sorry to break it to you.
You're either a kike or are ok with being censored.
>>293911>It's laughable to me how any wizard would be upset about it getting fucked over.
Because you don't understand what a precedent is?
The website had plenty of fucking with roasties too. Wizards could be on there fucking with roasties all day long.
Cloudflare cucks to any kind of left wing push. It had nothing to do with money.
only thing i find funny is how quickly they did a 180 just because some literal tranny falseflag fedposted then reported xer own comment to cf. dont really care about "precedents" or bad things happening to josh.
Yeah, I'm the boogeyman in your head because I'm not falling in line with this retarded narrative.>>293917
The precedent of not caring about a some failed normalfag shithole that used to fuck with us getting fucked over? Yes.>>293919
And? I don't give a shit if something good or bad happens to random succubi online. That line of thinking is for crabs.
Ok, you're intentionally being dense. When they shut down imageboards for wrongthink let me know how much of a non-event this was.
They’ve been doing that forever. You think this is the first time backend services have shut sites down? End of 2000s registrars black listed people and sites meaning no domain and data centre providers forced hosts to drop sites. People cried then how they didn’t have the $200k to be their own registrar for their text only pedo sites. I think wizchan got booted from the host last year over the lolicon/cp-spam?
It’s all about noise. If there’s enough noise it gets to people who do stuff, rather than some customer representative in a call centre, then shit can happen.
Forums obsessed with harassing individuals and doxxing them or celebrating harm coming to them, imageboards associated with mass shooters and celebrating/encouraging killing innocent people. These are actually much more justified than dailystormer which doesn’t call for violence or the old text based pedo sites.
We have tor services now anyway so it’s easy to stay online, kiwi farms has one that works. In conclusion - it’s not some sign of acceleration. Also kiwifarms are norm niggers and seeing their delusional self defence of being assholes is funny.
>let's defend kf because… free speech!
this makes free speech advocacy look bad by association, you idiots are unable to understand that you are shooting yourselves in the foot
but we all know it's not about an honest and disinterested struggle for some noble principle, you are just mad your "side" lost a battle in this meaningless culture war.
You either have free speech or you don't.
I don't know if you've transistioned or something, but all the things that kf did still happens on twitter and reddit as long as they are the "right" target. Nothing that major happened to kf until anti-tranny topics started being corralled across the major sites into niche places.
In truth we probably should seen this coming years ago, we're seeing the sun set on the wild west internet.
That works in reverse, lots of people are only interested because there’s a tranny foe. Kiwifarms has been kicked off hosts before.
Kiwi fags are fucking awful. There are few bigger twats on the planet as big as Joshua Moon. But KW has value as an archive of things people want to forget. There are loads of pedos who try to delete stuff after it gets caught. And 'rape victims' telling lies and trying to walk it back when called out. KF as a resource for investigating people is highly valuable and protects many communities unrelated to it. Wizards in niche communities know they all have pedo creeps and weirdos in them that you need to be aware of before they do serious damage. KF makes it much harder for those people to jump from group to group fucking them up and moving on.
Most the site is garbage and a waste of time. But so is every other website.
>>293929>this makes free speech advocacy look bad by association, you idiots are unable to understand that you are shooting yourselves in the foot>You CAN have free speech, but only if you use it only to say things the censors don't mind. If you ever say anything the censors don't want you to say, then it's your fault that they get rid of freedom of speech.
Every. single. time.
>get your comeuppance
waaaah i am the victim!
>>293931>You either have free speech or you don't
lol, well you dont and never did. it isnt magically gone now
just because the poor little innocent josh fanclub got dropped.
>>293939>you don’t have any rights so just accept it
What the fuck kind of logic is this.
about to start a revolution there, champ?
A tranny's logic.
i am sure you will rise up any day now. just right after you get done impotently attempting to posture online, over a tabloid for losers getting deplatformed no less.
This is not how you win people over to your side.
i dont give a fuck about your culture war shit and obsession with tranny boogeywomen past laughing at you naive idiots for being either legally retarded or underage by thinking some precedent has just been set because a bunch of faggots cant gangstalk spergs as openly or efficiently anymore.
maybe if they shutdown more of your pressure-release playpens, you will feel like getting off your fat fucking prolapsed ass and doing something.
feel free to keep yapping like an annoying and weak toy breed, deluding yourself that you are "fighting the good fight," and i will continue to lmao at you. all this ass damage over merely being told that free speech doesnt exist. pathetic.
You're the only person ITT getting emotional over this.
>>293947>three empty replies>n-no ur butthurt l-lol
sure thing. really btfo'ing the nwo by being a whiny little bitch on line there, bud.
>>293946>i dont give a fuck about your culture war shit
It's odd, every time I hear somebody say this it always seems like they care a whole lot.
>obsession with tranny boogeywomen>tranny>boogeywomen
Uh, witchy, are you sure you should be posting on this site?
thanks for taking the "boogeywomen" bait, retard. im sure that happens to you often enough. just a funny little quip to make after some dumbass shits out the most stock cuckchan response of all time (seeing trannies everywhere).>n-no u really do care…!
not at all, it's just fun to shit on idiots stuck deep up their own asses. this meme war shit was always a pointless diversion. attempting to rattle your skull and snap you out of your delusions isnt a huge concern for me. either you start spending your time more constructively (or at least doing something more fun, unless sounding braindead is fun for you i guess) or i get to munch popcorn at your ignorance.
i am not saying to roll over and die (though that's essentially what wasting your time whining online is) nor am i presenting my own side. you inattentive kids are getting emotional and acting like faggotniggerfarms getting knocked over is an extinction event, that it was the last bastion of free peaches (or even one to begin with). how do you ever expect your situation to improve if you cant even be pragmatic about it? of course i dont agree with controlling speech to the point that you can excommunicate someone from society merely because they said a no-no word, but that is the world you live in and it has been this way for some time. speech has been heavily moderated for decades now and it is only going to tighten more and more whether or not kiwitrannies are allowed to proliferate their filth.
>>293952>desperately hoping for me to be a tranny to satisfy a personal kink of yours>implying trannies are a monolithic political entity>implying trannies dont frequent kf>implying hating trannies and laughing at josh's misfortune are mutually exclusive
K, keep me posted.
im not flirting. sorry if you came to believe that i was.
>>293946>obsession with tranny boogeywomen
Man you can't utter one bad words about trannys without them going mental. It's strange, this is the /pol/ thread where it's nigger this and succubi that, and immigrant this and jews that but uh oh, someone said a mean word to a tranny.
I mean, this thing is bigger than trannies but they have to make it about themselves.>>293933>But KW has value as an archive of things people want to forget.
It's lets you know who your mods are.
I just thought about this after seeing that video where they cut that soldier penis off.
If there was an all out war scenario with bombs going off globally, drones in the skies and homes getting raided then most people who are not able to defend themselves would end up having to suck some rich perverts cock just to get a spot in his bomb shelter if they dont want to get their faces melted off by a detonation, it would be like fallout but way worse. I don't think people would help each other like pacifist think, you'd most likely have to fight over food and shelter with ghetto ass people and militias or follow orders of gov soldiers who might end up raping you, whatever happens it will be way worse than what most people assume.
so ukraine has not collapsed yet despite what the pro-russian shills have been predicting since the beginning of the war, how are they spinning this?
it sounds like you are doubling down on calling me a tranny, which would just go toward proving my point that you see them everywhere and use your boogeywoman as a way to handwave anything said. it's non-sequitur given that im not a tranny nor do i defend them. it still doesnt help your case even if you were arguing with a tranny, though im not sure how you are going to argue against the reality of your own situation (being that getting butthurt online has never reversed censorship in any meaningful capacity, nobody gives a fuck about jews shilling games for example).
maybe i should stoop to your level and accuse you of being one of josh's orbiters? i would have much more of a case for that than you do for me supposedly being a tranny, given how much you reach in trying to portray kf as providing some benevolent service to the public. they certainly arent being deplatformed for cataloguing pedophiles. too bad so sad thats not even their focus.>>293968
now THAT is some 4chan 2022 shit. as a bit of an aside, it is actually pretty funny that dank epic meme "soldiers" avatarfag with reddit frog. it's perfect. they waste their time believing their slacktivism is doing something, anything even, while the pot of water continues to a approach a simmer. it's nothing more than a new coat of paint for morons impressed by dweeby crap like Anonymous.
>>293977>being that getting butthurt online has never reversed censorship in any meaningful capacity
Why does it burn your ass so much that people are (rightfully) angry about this? Are we taking away oxygen from your dickless crotch? This is a /pol/ thread where people bitch about a lot of things that can't be affected.
>given how much you reach in trying to portray kf as providing some benevolent service to the public
Why are you trying to twist words? KF is KF, a gossip forum on e-celebs I don't care what they do, I care that despite doing nothing illegal it got taken down because someone was butthurt.
oh you can mindlessly bitch alright, that much is obvious. just saying this shit isnt new and bitching isnt going to reverse it. furthermore, i dont see the reason to care considering that it couldnt have happened to a more pathetic bunch of dregs.
>>293977>now THAT is some 4chan 2022 shit. as a bit of an aside, it is actually pretty funny that dank epic meme "soldiers" avatarfag with reddit frog. it's perfect. they waste their time believing their slacktivism is doing something, anything even, while the pot of water continues to a approach a simmer. it's nothing more than a new coat of paint for morons impressed by dweeby crap like Anonymous.
We can agree the us army has been ineffective in psychological operations. Who is proverbially boiling the pot of water in your example, btw?
i am inclined to call them jews to be succinct, but obviously it's a lot more complicated than that. maybe better to say the corporate feedback loop that governing bodies have been warped into.
(mostly just think things need to be dialed back quite a bit, not that they will be. government lost control of the private sector, if it ever had that in the first place, and now top industry is more or less self-destructing with malicious practices)
>>293981>i am inclined to call them jews to be succinct, but obviously it's a lot more complicated than that. maybe better to say the corporate feedback loop that governing bodies have been warped into.
There are quite literally israeli firms involved in perceptions management, as one was discovered in an internal wikipedia probe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-09-27/Special_report
but I think I know what you mean. If the aim is to make 4chan and kf more effective then they would need to engage with that space, where actual exchanges of corporate and governing power take place, instead of having their energies misdirected into slacktivism as you said
i think it is objective to say that jewish interests are the priority by far, just not the only interests at play. although, jews are known to fill in as activists for groups that they have no business representing and surely paper trails can be obfuscated when they have a lot of weight in the banking sector, so it very well could be as simple as just saying jews.
I remember also when kf targeted wizchan (because the users there literally think they are morally better than us), and one of our admins turned out to be a normalfag and fled to kf and cried about us.
I don't think anyone really knows what is gonna happen. Both sides have been adamant that they are gonna win, but Ukraine have been the ones beating pro-Russian expectations. I think if Russia pulls off a full mobilisation they could probably grind Ukraine to an eventual defeat, but its a politically risky move for Putin, he'd be drafting his own supporters in Moscow rather than this being a special operation for rural Russian rednecks / poor people. Who knows what will happen
i read and listen to some 'alt' pro-russian media every once in a while and it seems to be business as usual, same talking points as in february, russia winning, nato evil, ukraine nazi etc
One of Queen Elizabeth's body doubles just died again and they're passing this one off as the real one, so the UK and commonwealth are governed by a king. White boy summer ending with a BANG!!!!!
>>293993>one of our admins turned out to be a normalfag and fled to kf and cried about us.
That's….unsurprising to be honest.
He's talking about Hotwheels from nearly 10 years ago, newfrog (newfag from /r9k/)
Jews don't have that much power.
All they have is some lobbying groups, some decentralized ethno-centrism and useful white idiots.
You give too much credit to Jews, as they don't even have racial purity. Only some slapped together "ethno"-religious cult.
On the contrary, you give them too little. It's really not a well-kept secret as to how much influence they have in the upper echelons of industry, especially in the media business. Furthermore, it doesn't matter how mongrelized they are so long as they are able to mobilize around their group identity, which they most certainly are able compared to mostly any other group.
I mean Jews don't have the power to construct a social media company out of thin air, then get the rest of the world to join.
It doesn't work like that.
I didn't say anything about it happening at the snap of a finger. One or two years isn't very long and platforms can boom or fall out of favor within that span.
Nobody is going to stop using Twitter because some ADL clown tweets that Twitter and Elon Musk are racist "just because" or even write an article calling Elon Musk racist.
They deal in subversion, manipulation and fraud. They have no ability to create a platform exactly like Twitter out of thin air, then market it to the world. It simply isn't possible.
>>294049>out of thin air>out of thin air
OK, have fun wrestling with that strawman.
I don't think he ever intended to run the site, it was just stock market manipulation
That is easy to prove wrong.
Tik tok came out of no where with the biggest marketing campaign you have ever seen. It's incredibly easy for them to do the same thing IF they wanted to. But there's no point when they own Twitter and Facebook which already fill that niche. >>294059
Market manipulation and revealing how hollow Twitter really is and their bias. He trolled them into admitting a lot of their problems in public.
Absolutely true, the moment succubi were emancipated fall of western civilization has begun. Europeans will be replaced with foreigners if they can’t remove emancipation of succubi.
succubi are absolutely not capable of being dedicated or passionate about something if it doesn't involve their own immediate selfish needs. They are extremely shallow and manipulative and experience life through a lens of childish emotions that are all over the place because they are used to getting carried on their hands and feet all day. They can't do research on their own, they badly copy all ideas from men and the only things they can come up with themselves always somehow involve their genitals which further shows that they are low in intelligence.
All of this causes them to not have the ability to make meaningful decisions and that's why they should have never been allowed to vote.
the real problem is human rights in general
Because most of the traffic is made up of bots and Twitter lied about this in their reports. He knows that if Twitter tries to sue him over breach of contract the fact that they are lying about their traffic will be revealed in court which will be suicide for the company.
>>294065>they are lying about their traffic will be revealed in court which will be suicide for the company
Absolutely nothing would happen to Twitter as a company. Maybe a bit of a stock slump, but that is about it.
It doesn't matter if most of the traffic is made up of bots (which I doubt) because every relevant figure in the world congregates there to put out their stream of consciousness.
Proof that Twitter was lying to their investors would absolutely devastate the company. Fraud is illegal. The people involved could face jail time. They'd definitely see lawsuits from investors, maybe a class action since they're publicly traded.
Yeah, doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, not even slightly.
I don't think people would leave Twitter in significant numbers except for extreme leftist faggots. The media doesn't have enough power to convince the masses to leave a huge social media outlet like Twitter. It's very similar to Facebook/Meta, the mainstream media has been exposing a lot of bad stuff about it but people don't care.
It's also almost impossible to create a new huge social outlet like that, things are pretty much stacked now and it's gonna stay that way. The only new thing that came up was Tik tok and that was an exception since it was a whole new concept taking advantage of modern algorithms but as of classic social media it will always stay with the ones we have now, they can't invent another wheel so to speak, things might only change when we have actual VR with brainchips implanted or whatever but even then it will most likely still be same brands.
>>294061>Absolutely true, the moment succubi were emancipated fall of western civilization has begun.
The problem with this reasoning is the idea that power comes from the people. How the people imagine they are organized largely doesn't matter (given the profusion of social systems) when they are powerless. When we say succubi were emancipated the material outcome of that was doubling the workforce, being granted a vote (which they are browbeaten for if they don't "vote properly" as a bloc), and competing social institutions were demolished to further centralize power. It's clear no such emancipation has taken place, one half of the population was just reorganized to produce political outcomes that were already decided in advance. The suffragettes were like any other modern protest movement. If the aims of the protestors align with power then it's permitted, otherwise attempts will be made to subvert or suppress it
why don't we try to take on these people who wish to continue this stupid covid shit.
Elon Musk should make me his head financial advisor.
>>294060>Tik tok came out of no where with the biggest marketing campaign you have ever seen
Just came to say this is wrong. Tiktok was built off musica.ly and the demise of vine.
I'd also like to point out that Tiktok is not even comparable to Twitter.
They serve an entire different function.
Splitting hairs is a good rhetorical tactic.
You're framing the situation as though tik tok's success is due to a marketing campaign when that is incorrect.
We all know that the success of tiktok is that it can run on any shit phone ever since android 7 and underage bitches moving their assets, what should worry us is the total failure of Metaverse, I don't know but seems they dont allow characters from established IPs nor I know if you can make your own games like in VRchat or Roblox, all I know is that you chat and it looks like ass. This should worry us, if metaverse fails Wizchan goes down with it.
>>294083>if metaverse fails Wizchan goes down with it.
Way more people use TikTok than the previous version. Guess which one I've never seen ads for. Hmmm, yep. Marketing has nothing to do with its success.
society do or dont do what me conditioned to want
It's insane how deeply consumerist people are. I don't know if consumerist is the right word but people can't even have a basic black t-shirt without a big brand logo emblazoned on top.
It’s pretty funny how I grew up in the anti-consumer backlash to the 90s, books like No Logo were focused on undermining lifestyle advertising and the way consumers were manipulated. Discussions of economic theory around how price manipulates consumers want mainstream and a great cynicism arose about consumerism, brands, identity.
And now - everyone obsessed with artificial scarcity branded goods, obsessed with social media lifestyle advertising on steroids, Asian countries seeming almost soulless in their addiction to consumerism and plastic surgery. People truly hooked on these meta social stories moving in to crypto and more levels of artificial ownership and identity. They love it.
Society talking more about experience and the real but in practice jumping head first in to nonsense consumerism.
We live in an era of apathetic submission. Everyone knows corporations are evil babykillers, everyone knows amazon pays shit wages and for long hours, everyone knows their iphone is made in china by 8 year olds. People just don't fucking care.
Why can't the government just audit hospitals already so we can have affordable healthcare? The Biden administration is forcing price transparency, but that just means patients get to see how much the hospital is going to fuck them over.
The problem with healthcare and education is price gouging, why doesn't anyone talk about that?
If I ever get branded goods I keep them for years to come because I hardly wear them, I also only get cheap middle class phones. It's weird and pathetic how so many young people think everyone in basic clothes without an iphone in hand is a bum or not doing good, they also feel naked and fucked up if they don't have any branded clothes or expensive phones themselves. I witnessed a lot of teenagers bully others for not having expensive stuff. That really wasn't a thing back when I was a kid in the 2000s as well but maybe it was already a thing in cities. Young people even bully each other for not having an expensive LED keyboard nowadays lol retards.
that has always been a thing, my dad has even told me stories of his friends as a kid (in the 70s) being embarrassed for wearing cheap brands. You most likely did not notice this shit in 2000s because you were a loser that hardly communicated with your peers at school
>>294108>being a normalfag dickhead>>294107
It's always been there to an extent, but I don't remember literally every single fucking person, working class or middle class being decked in branded clothes. I don't even see those discount brand shoes anymore. Every fucking day as I go to work I see various normalfags with shopping bags from designer stores.
The irony is that living with less, and actively rejecting consumerism and materialism has been largely co-opted by upper middle class people now, as a way of life and a way to virtue signal. Things like minimalism, cycling rather than owning a fancy car, 'ethical' shopping, dropping everything to go live in the sticks… with how things are going they're going to rebrand homelessness as being fashionable. When you're a genuinely poor prole you're double fucked, can't afford fancy crap but can't brag about it either like it's a voluntary life choice.
>The Irish government is now paying 2,000 artists, musicians, writers, and performers a ‘basic income’ of €325 ($329) each week.
is a basic income inevitable? i feel like it is becoming more and more normalized and mainstream. no one knew wtf ubi was 8 yrs ago, now my own fucking parents know what it is and talked to me about it unprompted over the phone last week. i dont see a future where we dont have some sort of ubi
Any sort of 'life style' you self select is by definition middle class. The poorest people cannot choose not to be poor and to have more things. The working class have slightly more choices but where they go on holiday and what brand of TV/car they get is about the most of it. Any one able to make choices like cycling to work or spending more on their food for 'ethical' reasons has to have a middle class income to afford the luxury.
>>294130>The poorest people cannot choose not to be poor
Choose to not spend all your money on cigarettes and alcohol. Choose to not have 4 kids when you have a part-time minimum wage job. Choose to not spend $50 on lottery tickets every week.
Such a retarded post. If someone spent $50 a week on the lottery they would have won and not be poor anymore
>>294131>trying to make wizards into wagies
Suck my dick kike.>>294134>If someone spent $50 a week on the lottery they would have won and not be poor anymore
While that kike made a retarded post, spending $50 a week on the lotto would not mean they would win. Assuming there are 50 numbers and 5 balls, the chance of getting all correct would be 1 in 254,251,200.
I know this is a right-wing /pol/ thread but Jesus fucking Christ do I hate liberals. With a right-wing fucker you at least know where you stand with them. With liberals, it's all about building a narrative, an image, of themselves, of others, where no matter what they do, what they have, they'll always paint themselves as the saviours of mankind in a (conveinently) never ending struggle against evil.
And why would you find it annoying? That mostly makes it easier to expose their words and morals as the fatally flawed diarrhea they are.
>>294070>It's clear no such emancipation has taken place
you think a succubus could afford to buy a mansion by spreading her ass on livestream an hour or two a day at any time before suffrage? wtf
That's basically what all arranged marriages were.
no, the succubi did not own the title to the house, did not decide to pass down what to whom, etc.
patrimony reigned. you're out of your mind to think succubi are not fully emancipated and empowered.
nevermind the pernicious effects on society as a whole of having disgusting whores outearning doctors, people who keep the electrical grid functioning, sanitation workers, whatever, performing the most vile acts while not even having to fuck anyone as prostitutes do.
not even close
Why do you care? What exactly is making you so angry?
wonder if you would be complaining if videos of fat old jews raping kids were allowed on chinese spyware apps
She's a dumb whore. A psychopathic narrow minded whore.
why are you two succubi on wizchan?
>>294159>Sand nigger shit skin Muslim is butthurt over a wemb of people having party.
cant't disagree less!
all politicians are psychopaths but at least the bitch isnt raping children. sorry you are too dumb to comprehend what is worse by far.
good keep them there we dont need them in the usa
Then shout out right in their faces the harsh reality: they breed like plague, while their own people is still coming and breeding like plague both here and their birthcountries leaving their own similars starve while they undeservedly occpuy our zone, making this country's political mindhive turn more into their collective mindset, the same one that ruined their countries of origin which still rot while they happily make yours more unstable by shamelessly breeding. EXTENDING MISERY, that's what the lefts promote with their "human rights" codswallop
They do not care about their own people - they deserve nothing, and leftards will destroy theirselves and everything around due to being nice towards those who should be abandoned for their cattle behaviour.
save the wizrace? I'm sorry wizards but I'm gonna need you all to breed to ensure the future of the wizrace, very small price to pay.
I always say antinatalism as leftist at heart. Right wing values life. Leftism is okay with abortion and euthanasia and just leans in that direction. Antinatalism is like the final step of progressivism and tolerance.
Anything specific you don't like? Finland is a NEET paradise, and it didn't virtue signal like Sweden letting in too many migrants without thinking. They run the country humanely and well, I've been there myself and it feels slower and laid back.
Maybe its the NATO stuff that bothers you, if so I don't know what to say, I don't think Finland is gonna invade Russia ever, but can't say the same for Russia invading other countries so better be prepared for self defense and most Finns want it.
I think its inevitable but it could be a very long time before it happens, I see it getting fought against and delayed. What happens when people see it as a better alternative to some of the shit jobs. The rich are gonna gear up to fight it from happening rather than make jobs less shit. You will see Tucker Carlson on FOX calling it a test pilot for socialism and saying that Americans don't want it and it won't work. CNN will get told by their rich owners to run a story that UBI is racist against minorities somehow.
female bad, it ok if very bad men do very bad thing forever. haha, me winning da sex volleyball tourney. ook ook!
>>294222>implying females or democracy are allowed to make real decisions
keep suckin that corpo schlong,ya super useful moron
There is no grand conspiracy.
It's just a bunch of incompetent retards like Sanna Marin running things in a gynocentric society.
Do you think she has any groundbreaking and revolutionary thought running through her head? She's a fucking incompetent retard.
There doesn't have to be a grand conspiracy when you have people like this running your countries to the ground.
it is amazing, your stupidity i mean. you have to cry about simps or something just as retarded, like you think some grand defense of female politicians has been made. nah, you are such a gay loser that you refuse to acknowledge the thousands of years of damage done to the world by male leaders. you are a fucking idiot. there are no teams decided by gender.
Yeah, just 2,000 years of European superiority and civilization just goes "poof" within 100 years of giving rights to succubi.
You're dumb and retarded.
Not that guy, not Finn either, but do you have some concrete examples of what this succubus has done to fuck up the country?
>>294229>Yeah, just 2,000 years of European superiority and civilization just goes "poof" within 100 years of giving rights to succubi.
Rome fell in the 5th century and Spain was conquered by the Moors in the 8th century, so European history isn't a linear process>>294216>Maybe its the NATO stuff that bothers you, if so I don't know what to say, I don't think Finland is gonna invade Russia ever, but can't say the same for Russia invading other countries so better be prepared for self defense and most Finns want it.
NATO treats any attack on a member nation as an attack on all, so Finland would be obligated to respond. If that response involved stationing US missiles in Finland to gain nuclear primacy over Moscow then that will result in a straightforward nuclear exchange. It's not a matter of self defense but collective defense
I despise right-wingers so much. I just want to hunt them down and torture them. They represent everything that characterizes normals and their thinking: elitism, worshipping those of high status, stepping on anyone who is a minority or different from them, falling for stupid meme values without any critical thinking, etc.
Right-wing is about masturbating to hierarchies always and so it is always capital-worship or capitalism. It doesn't matter if it is fascism, monarchy or feudalism, if it is about respecting hierarchy in society then it is capitalism, nobody ever ruled in society who was poor or low status. If you want to stick to bootlicking then you will end up with capitalism in one form or another. Right-wing is money worship and materialism at its core.
In contrast, the left is about using revolution, force, violence to determine who should rule. If you ask me that is a much more just way of deciding who should rule society. To make money you need to be a well-adjusted normalfag and so right-wing is normal-worship. To use violence you can be anyone, as long as you can lift your hands and can walk you have a chance.
As someone who values asceticism and spirituality I find my ideal system in leftism. I'm not a marxist because I'm not a materialist but still, I'm a communist and anarchist at heart. I don't understand anyone who claims to be an outcast, outsider, weirdo in any way or wizard and is a right-winger. I mean, you really don't see the contradictions in your worldviews? Right-wing is pro-society and for those who are well-adjusted enough to make a living on their own through lawful means. It isn't for poor NEETs.>>294238>Rome fell in the 5th century and Spain was conquered by the Moors in the 8th century, so European history isn't a linear process
Roman culture didn't end in the 5th century, it survived through historical texts and such. Entropy is another right-wing meme. Linear progress is an actual thing. You have to be deluded to deny that there is a line of progress from ancient Rome through Christian times to Enlightenment and forward.
>>294239>Entropy is another right-wing meme. Linear progress is an actual thing. You have to be deluded to deny that there is a line of progress from ancient Rome through Christian times to Enlightenment and forward.
Generally grand historical narratives don't stand up to examination, as we find a multiplicity of local histories in reality. One of the recent developments in history as an academic discipline has been centering previously marginalized histories, as we have come to understand our view of history is shaped by power as much as by actual events
Whatever you imagine entropy to be would similarly be another grand historical narrative, perhaps "natural degeneration" in opposition to your view of "natural progress", the purpose of which is to frame your political opponents within a dialectic you've established. The slogan "I'm on the right side of history" is obviously just rhetoric, but it also reveals what really lies behind it
Even libright? You seem to be taking about statright and authright.
Do you feel the same about libright?
But leftism is about socialism, materialism, YOLO, and being a deceitful scorn by following miserable passions.
You are in a contradiction, except for vegetarianism, animalism and caring for the environment which are the few things with some spirit within the left.
They are delusional, misinformed and their scope of reality omits whatever they do not like. Diffusion and ingenuity are amongst the traits of the left, as it is hypersensitivity, childish rages and hypocrite speech of snowflakiness and letting the nations be ruined with inmigration and other laws that slowly destroy them by generating power and legal vacants which are quickly filled by despicable individuals who know well to deceive them.
Leftism is to promote muslim rapefugees to anger the authright and then discover that they had a point when these rapefugees give you a beating and start overcrowding your land and mistreating you. Ingenuity and childish rages is the left
You convienly forgot that leftism represents normgroid shit like collectivism.
The fact that we have superior technology nowadays proves that we are superior to the romans and other ancient cultures to me. Also, romans didn't have access to the culture of the future (obviously) but we have access to their culture. I don't understand anyone who is critical of progress. Did the greeks and romans send people to the moon? No, our generation did. Did the crusaders build atomic bomb? No, we did.>>294241
I feel that libertarian right leads back exactly to the mainstream version of right-wing politics in the end. I can respect individual anarchism, whatever it is supposed to be though. But I don't think it is as efficient as the leftist counterpart of it. I support revolutionary plans. You can't make a revolution on your own.>>294245
Collectivism can be both right or left-wing. It also isn't inherently a bad thing, depends on the form of collective you have to deal with. A collective where resources are distributed equally is a desirable form of collectivism, while a collective like Nazi Germany where only the strong and useful people are rewarded is a negative form of collectivism. Individualism also has various forms, not all of it are good. Middle Or Higher Class capitalist individualism is responsible for Ayn Rand and similar thought systems to hers. I would say that individualism is almost always a negative thing except if you do it leftist libertarian/anarchist style. Because most of the time individualism just means basically "I don't owe you anything, go wageslave yourself". To be a NEET, it is desirable to have a collective we can leech on.>>294242
Most of you what you say about us could be said about your people too. Being delusional, childish, sensitive, etc.
Neo-liberals don't import refugees to make you butthurt, they do it to gain a steady and big voting base. That is all. These people don't care about ideologies, they just want to stay in power or get power. That said, they aren't even proper leftists, they are just neolib capitalists and radical individualists. They don't want to abolish the state and classes, they just want power and to shape the state in their own image.
Is great and one of the best things.>materialism
Right-wing is more materialistic, it cares about blood, genetics, etc. and wants to centralize all the wealth in the hands of their elite.>YOLO
It is true, though.>following miserable passions
That is how humans work, yes.
and who gave them rights? and who gave the jews power? nice selfie btw, world is in the toilet and most leaders are still men but you hyperfixate on some clueless dried-up whore. find better targets for your impotent rage, retard.
Seen that pic many times and heard arguments like this too. I'm not individualist in the sense you use this word. I think bourgeois individualism is cancer through and through, you can call it capitalism or whatever you want it, when you try to have a system that is built upon exploitation of people and inequality then it will be shit in the end. Because in this "individualism" only the privileged people can be individuals while others are slaves to them and their capital.
People can be true individuals if they are free and equal only.
If I can't even freely decide what to do with my own labor then in what sense am I free? If the 'collective' (ie state) owns my labor, that is, has the exclusive right to decide what my labor can and cannot be used for, then how am I not anything less than slave of the collective?
>>294247>he fall to history for normgroids meme
You can't cross van allen belt without advanced tech
>>294239>using revolution, force, violence to determine who should rule>I'm a communist and anarchist at heart
so you are an anarchist that wants to use violent revolution to rule others? peculiar…
>I mean, you really don't see the contradictions in your worldviews?
"Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."
uh yes, females have social dominance over men because men are white knight cretins who bend over backwards to please them (evident by all media being feminist tainted crap)
>>294228>there are no teams decided by gender.
except succubi see themselves as a class identity and view men as the opposing team, like when a succubus falsely accuses a man all the other succubi come out of the woodwork to defend her even when shes proven malicious (amber turd) - men dont have that kind of solidarity, so yes there are teams decided by gender, clueless tard
The collective isn't the state. The state by definition is a small elite who govern larger society. And nobody would own your labor, the difference would be that instead of slaving away for your capitalist boss you would be doing productive work for others who in turn would do their work for you. Obviously work has to be done but exploitation is a feature of the capitalist meatgrinder society. You wouldn't be forced to work any more than you are forced to work nowadays. The difference lies in solidarity. In capitalism solidarity is discouraged as it based on competition. In anarchism you would help others and they would help you in turn. You wouldn't need to have a bunch of paper called money to prove that you are worthy of the help.>>294260
I want to use violence to make a world where nobody rules anyone.
>>294264>The collective isn't the state
So then who would go around enforcing the arbitrary edict that people can't own capital or enter into work contracts for a wage? >And nobody would own your labor, the difference would be that instead of slaving away for your capitalist boss you would be doing productive work for others who in turn would do their work for you
If I want to sell my labor to someone in exchange for an income and your organization uses force to prevent us from entering into that agreement then yes, I am being stripped of the right to my labor. If I own my labor then I get to decide what to do with my labor, not you.>I want to use violence to make a world where nobody rules anyone.
If you're imposing your will over others using violence then you are ruling them.
>>294265>who would go around enforcing the arbitrary edict that people can't own capital or enter into work contracts for a wage
The people?>right to labor
You mean right to exploitation/slavery? So you are free to decide to be…not free?>If you're imposing your will over others using violence then you are ruling them.
Violence is the natural way of life and natural law is the only law there is. People settling their disputes with violence isn't forcing your will onto others, it is just natural law and might makes right.
>>294267>So you are free to decide to be…not free?
Yes, that's how freedom works. If I want to exchange my free time for money, that's none of your business. Because I own my free time, I own my labor, not you, and not "the people".
Please explain to me how exactly your system of violently forcing people to act the way you want them to will work exactly. You claim that a centralized government would not exist and then you immediately start talking about how violence will be used to quell dissent. How exactly do you see this working? Is it just a fantasy where you're an omnipotent god or something and are able to just personally kill and torture the people you dislike? Or do you seriously believe that whims of a violent mob will perfectly align with your utopian ethos?
Your idea of a money-less society where people have no bosses but just work towards a common goal could perhaps work in a village where everyone gets along. In fact that kind of community is common in many parts of the world. The problem is that it doesn't scale well. Once you have a town with thousands of people, where there are people starting businesses which compete with other businesses, and need to hire workers who have the option to work for their competition, then capitalism is needed to balance things out. You call it exploitation, but capitalism only results in exploitation when companies are so powerful they can bribe the government to act on their behalf, or they have a complete monopoly so workers have no power to negotiate. So long as there's sufficient competition, and workers are willing to bargain with their employers, they won't be exploited.
So you dream about continuing the cuckold life as the drone of some capitalist boss you can serve faithfully. Huh.
I'm not talking about any unorganized mob, I am talking about organized and planned revolution led by the proletarians of this system. We will uphold the ideal and will persuade people to see things our way. It's either our way or the rope they will get. To keep the body healthy you have to get rid of diseased parts.>>294270
Capitalism is built on exploitation because it purposefully creates tension among people of the proletariat. It is about "competition", you need to make one worker or poor person hate the other one in order to keep them from uniting and taking charge of things. Classic divide and conquer. Not everyone wants to slave away under some capitalist boss who laughs in your face while you are working as hard as you can just to be able to survive while he has easy access to resources and comforts because he has more money than you.
The purpose of work should be to be constructive and useful for the collective, not to earn wealth for a small elite of people.
It doesn't sound like this new society will have any meaningful benefits for the average person. You're just dreaming of taking control of the authoritarian centralization of violence for your own selfish ends. And given how bitter and vindictive you come off as you'd probably manage to hurt even more people than the current people in charge, which really saying something.
>>294271>It is about "competition", you need to make one worker or poor person hate the other one in order to keep them from uniting and taking charge of things.
Maybe in Victorian England it was so. In a more developed society however, the competition goes both ways. Yes workers compete with each other for jobs and promotions, but companies also compete for workers, and are willing to offer better pay and benefits to get them. Just look at how the labor market is today. And of course workers can have solidarity. While a crony capitalist government breaks up organized labor, a pro-worker government promotes it. But to force companies to pay more, or worse yet to be collectively owned, will always have unintended consequences.
>Not everyone wants to slave away under some capitalist boss who laughs in your face while you are working as hard as you can just to be able to survive while he has easy access to resources and comforts because he has more money than you.
If you don't like your boss then quit your job, until you find a boss who respects you. And other people will do likewise, until the shitty boss can't find workers and goes bankrupt. Again this kind of thing is happening right now. The only reason it doesn't happen quicker is because interference from the government/central bank keeps bad businesses afloat.
>The purpose of work should be to be constructive and useful for the collective, not to earn wealth for a small elite of people.
I agree. But utilizing the free market is essential for that. To take extreme measures like collectivizing production, setting price controls, or heaven forbid eliminating currency altogether, causes extreme disturbances which doesn't allow the economy to function efficiently. It is far more effective for the government to crack down on rentierism, excessive hoarding of resources, and to encourage more beneficial industries, while otherwise allowing the free market to function uninterrupted.
I never see this "competition" between employers for workers, so I guess you are talking about workers who are specialized for some obscure thing. Ordinary manual labor workers certainly don't get treated with respect or receive decent wages, I'm speaking in their name, they are the actual proletariat. I think by workers you thought of people with university degrees and or again, people who can do or possess some obscure skill. But I consider people like that to be bourgeois since they get special treatment. If you never enrolled in higher education or didn't learn a specific job for whatever reason you end up being treated like shit whether you flip burgers or wash cars.
>But to force companies to pay more, or worse yet to be collectively owned, will always have unintended consequences.
The consequences being that Mr.Boss will have less capital to spend on retarded luxuries while his workers will end up better.
>If you don't like your boss then quit your job, until you find a boss who respects you. And other people will do likewise, until the shitty boss can't find workers and goes bankrupt.
This never happened, I hope you know it. Workers are extremely vulnerable in capitalism, that is the cornerstone of capitalism itself. Real life shows us that workers are more likely to make compromises and to lower their expectations than the employers. Because they are forced to wageslave under bad circumstances, the alternative being starving or poverty. Of course, if you are a quantum physicist, lawyer or programmer then you wouldn't know the harsh world of the exploited laborer.
Idols only, created for the purpose of ensuring the existence of the higher classes who already start life on easy mode and possess lots of capital.>>294272>any meaningful benefits
Not being ordered around and treated like a slave by some trust fund baby is one huge benefit. Getting more resources and gaining economic equality isn't a benefit? Gaining more freedom isn't a benefit?
>You're just dreaming of taking control of the authoritarian centralization of violence for your own selfish ends.
Selfish, so like the people who make others wageslave for them nowadays? Everyone is selfish, some are just more ignorant and don't realize what is good for them. I know what is good for me and I want that.
>And given how bitter and vindictive you come off as you'd probably manage to hurt even more people than the current people in charge, which really saying something.
That is fine with me, I don't want to create a peaceful world, I want a world I think is just in my views. Nobody cares about me in the current system so I don't care about those who belong to the middle class and up there either. The blood of the rich and privileged will create a fine soil for the future socialism that is to come.
People are still going to be treated like a slave under your system. Actually they'll be treated like a slave more than they currently are because they won't have any actual freedom to decide what to do with their lives, they'll just be forced to obey you because you're pointing a literal gun at their heads. >I know what is good for me and I want that.
then allow other people to decide what's good for them instead of trying to bully and threaten them into following your ideal of how to live.
How will they be slaves if they will be free to do anything (as long as it doesn't hurt others) and have equality? You are a slave in normal society under a state and laws, if you decide to do things which don't hurt anyone but were deemed to be immoral by the creators of the law then you will be punished regardless.
Nobody would care about you wanting to slave away under a master all your life but it would have a negative effect on the collective ultimately. You would be serving some exploiter and that guy would slowly end gaining power (thanks to you and other sheep like you). Eventually he would want to impose his will on everyone and would form a circlejerk, church, political party, nation or state so he would be trouble. Better get rid of people like that and to punish/re-educate people like you.
>>294286>Nobody would care about you wanting to slave away under a master all your life but it would have a negative effect on the collective ultimately
Using this logic you can justify practically any arbitrary tyrannical law under the pretext that people are harming your vision for what the collective should look like. It's nonsensical logic completely divorced from any coherent moral axiom. Harming the collective means dumping toxins into a river or spree killing. Creating a culture that you personally find distasteful is not harm.
How is it not harmful to encourage bad behavior? I mean slaving away and master-slave relationships between people? The purpose of anarchy is to make people equal and free. If ranks are allowed to form again then there is no anarchy. Simple.
Because you don't own the collective opinion. If someone says something you don't like or even just does something you don't like, that's not violating any of your rights in any way. You obviously expect to be able to think and speak and make decisions for yourself in the ways in which you see fit so long as you aren't hurting anyone, so why don't you apply this expectation consistently and fairly to others and let them live the way they want? If the only way you can envision persuading the collective to think the way you want them to think via straight-out murdering people who disagree with you then there's something very wrong with your worldview.>If ranks are allowed to form again then there is no anarchy
And what do you call it when you and your goons murder and torture a huge swathe of the population if not hierarchy and rank? It honestly seems as though your moral justifications for this are just post-hoc pretext to justify a base desire to cause death and pain for people you don't like. None of the logic you're putting forth here makes sense.
This thread did hit bump limit btw, need new one.
Using violence is natural, ranks and hierarchies aren't.
And you seriously don't understand why someone who promotes anti-freedom and anti-equality attitude should be eliminated from an anarchist society? It's quite obvious why. If we had an anarchist utopia then we wouldn't want to fall back into the same mistakes and "sins" of past societies, would we?
Or do you think anarchism will just happen suddenly *poof* like that without any effort, violence or bloodshed? I've bad news for you, it won't come to us, we have to make it happen through force. Of course you have to kill undesirable elements and crush any opposition in your way, that is the requirement of any society before it can be "born".
How do you use violence against someone without creating a hierarchical relationship between you and your victim?
He is free to use violence and so am I too. That is equality. Ideally, it would be a 1-on-1 duel or fight as it is the most direct way of handling conflicts between men but stealth attacks and such are acceptable too. There are no rules in war.
I don't create hierarchy, if someone robs you on the street do they create hierarchy? They take your money and go on their way. Or if you can, you stop them and fuck them up. There is no hierarchy involved in violence, hierarchy emerges from civilization, the use of money and artificial ranks like between guard - prisoner, cop - average person, teacher - student, etc.
In that case, then in what sense does any society have hierarchy? You're always free to just disobey and use violence, which according to you completely negates the hierarchy intrinsic in physically dominating someone.
>hierarchy emerges from civilization, the use of money and artificial ranks like between guard - prisoner, cop - average person, teacher - student, etc.
The only reason why any of those ranks have any sort of power whatsoever is because they're backed up by violence. If the state wasn't allowed to lay a finger on you do you really think that "police officer" would be a title that held any power? What are they going to do, say mean things at you until you obey them? Every one of the examples you gave is an example of a relationship based on the ability of one party to wield violence over the other.
[Last 50 Posts]
You aren't "free" to disobey unless you want to go to jail. You are free to jump off a building sure but you won't do it without a parachute, right?
The State is something unnatural, it is based not on violence, you are wrong there, it is based on the spook of money and private property. Without deluding others into believing that they are better off serving you there is no state. The state is an illusion, a lie.