/lit/ - Literature

>>15263642
True for conservatives, but not necessarily for authoritarian reactionaries. Authoritarian reactionaries tend to be much more wise to the reality of how people are conditioned, and wish to impose a contrary conditioning paradigm. As for the sense in resisting what is entrenched... Revolutions are a part of the causal chain as well. There is no point in second-guessing our efforts to shape the future, since the future is not known to us (but you're right in that we should be more critical of the 'sacred cows' that got us here).

I'll admit, I do think that liberalism is a force of nature, and I wonder if it can meaningfully be reversed/suppressed; perhaps it can only be survived. Again though — we don't know the future, so fatalism is a foolish attitude.

As a side note, pretty much everyone rejects determinism. Even thinkers who appear to know better make pathetically weak compatibilist arguments. It's just not something most people can wrap their heads around, and is by no means a blindspot unique to conservatives and reactionaries.

>>14176913
I agree with the force of nature take. Abundance makes complacency and liberalism inevitable. Liberalism starts out providing some advantages, but once that genie is out of the bottle it's only a matter of time until it breeds civlization-destroying trends.

I view the jews as consumate opportunists. High verbal intelligence, high in-group preference, high level of unscrupulousness when dealing with out-groups. Of course they accelerate the decline, because it's an environment in which they thrive... They're like pigs in shit. That only makes them opportunistic parasites however; the actual disease is endemic to civilization itself.