/lit/ - Literature

My interpretation: the generalized concept of humanity is a beautiful thing but the more you get to know a specific individual, the more they strive away from that ideal of humanity. The more you know someone the more flaws of that person you get to know. That flawed individual might warp yoir idea of what a common human is like. You might associate any and all of those flaws with the rest of humanity rather than that individual. Assuming this is the correct interpretation, I vehemently disagree with it. The concept of humanity is an ugly thing to me and one should rather focus on love for specific individuals and not a general spookish love for humanity. I disagree with Dost like 99% of the time but he's still one of my favorite authors. Zosima said this and Zosima was kind of a mouthpiece for Dost's beliefs, at least I feel like that was the case.

hmmm

>>17107917
based

>>17107905
>My interpretation: the generalized concept of humanity is a beautiful thing but the more you get to know a specific individual, the more they strive away from that ideal of humanity. The more you know someone the more flaws of that person you get to know. That flawed individual might warp yoir idea of what a common human is like
Kinos for this feel?

>>17108084
the brothers karamazov

a character in a book he wrote said this. "he" didnt say this. hes criticising secularists and their fake notions of love which are really just fantasies about control. they "love" a homogenous wankbox, they dont actually go out and love the unlovable or love people along with their disgusting flaws. to dosto love is a daily grind of giving love to people undeserving and scornful of it, not a pleasant state of harmony.

>>17107822
based
Thats what the first chapters of my diary were about

Plenty of things are nicer the more abstract you get

>>17107822
I feel that, Dostoevsky

>>17107917
>Anarchism leads to racial totalitarianism
Hahah. No no no. Please be a fake quote.

>>17107822
The essence of the human soul is rationality. One can love the rational soul, which is common between men, but hate the irrational soul (what distinguishes between individual men).

>>17107822
the opposite of stirner

>>17108368
Honestly, how stupid are you that you think "anarchists" are anything more than pawns of the revolutionary government

>>17107822
Simple: Mankind is not Man, or even a specific man. It is an abstraction and a sink for cathexis.

Of course he'd counterpose this to real men, saying they are not abstractions - the corollary being that the whole real man is expressed in individual actions. This is why Dostoevsky's characters are like cartoons who act out ideologies.

>>17108375
based aristotelian

>>17108385
>the revolutionary government
Hahahhaha
The Soviets appeared to be a failed pawn in the capitalist scheme, sure. But actual socialism would break this. Not bitcoin, not tard neofascist whatever the fuck.

>>17108345
>>17108368
Do not derail my thread please

>>17108400
Ask this guy the same >>17107917

>>17108418
>h-he did it first!
Grow up.

>>17108399
>actual socialism
LMAO
aah yes, actual socialism, where you get complete totalitarian control of every institution and the lives of every person in order to rearrange society while simultaneously trying to keep the food coming during all this and fight counter revolutionary forces

surely surely its capitalism fault when this paradoxically totalitarian ideology does not end in the classless stateless society you predicted it would

oh, let me guess though, real socialism to you is when you wave a magic wand and faeries descend on the land and make everything happen magically for you, this making the actual functional details irrelevant

what a fucking joke you people are

>>17108154
Only person ITT who understands it.

>>17108427
The “derailment” starts at the beginning, anon.
It’s in the fucking Bible, fer crissake!

>>17108399
>real socialism has not been tried
How can your post become worse and worse

>>17108475
By being much more informed than you on the facts. Let it go at that.

>>17108458
*sigh*
No. That’s the tankie propaganda line “actually existing socialism”. I’m of course talking about actual libertarian-socialism, direct democracy etc. but get back to talking about Dostoevsky

>>17108478
ooh no i was wrong, you arent a magic faerie socialist, your a "the entire world will come together and sing kumbaya and everything will just magically work!" socialist

you deranged room temp iq people should be fucking ashamed of how you've held back humanity obsessing over these hilarious broken ideas instead of working on real solutions to real problems. honestly, fucking shame on you

>>17108488
>duuur im much more informed on the facts like how the means of production will just magically distribute themselves and there will be no division between normal people and administrators or law enforcement, no corruption within these not-classes and food vital goods will steadily flow uninterrupted during all of this, everything will just work. IT JUST WORKS I TELL YOU, THESE ARE FACTS. THIS IS REAL SOCIALISM. LITERALLY NO ONE HAS TRIED THESE IDEAS BEFORE

This >>17108509 is an example of what Dostoevsky was referring to. This individual either has certifiable brain damage or is a troll pretending to be as stupid, which amounts to the same thing really. I know if you change the conditions of a place, or the whole world, you would produce completely different people. This world produces lazy minded worker drones, but when the jobs are shipped out, the elites are left with a worker surplus, and so they get really careless with them. Let their children get poisoned, under educate them, sell them mind numbing entertainments till they commit suicide or end up on the streets. This one is a sad case and can only get worse, but I know he could still be saved. He just has to want it. No love lost on him in particular, though I wish him luck.

>>17108546
>writing a paragraph long insult because you're wrong, and you know youre wrong, and theres noting you can actually say to dispute actual facts, but you're in so deep you just cant accept it and you have to say something

>>17108546
he was saying your type of conceptual love is not actually love. the love of an idealogue is not love

>>17108568
Agape is love of a finer sort

>>17108587
or a self worship masquerading as love, an expansion of the self into a global circlejerk. second hand experience more and more gives people their idea of love, they sit in their insular communities and think the egoistic mirrior jerk off is "love" and would "love" a mankind that would agree to be part. Love is not pleasant and never has been, it is a burdensome commitment to loving each and every individual despite them not deserving or even wanting to be loved. not to love what you see of yourself in them, to love them and pain yourself in giving love. dostoyevsky was a deeply spiritual man, and to any spiritual person the "love" of social abstraction and fantasy is empty. he does not believe in a rational order but endless contradiction and pain until the universe ends, love is not a means for reconciliation with an unfair world or happiness, but a cross taken up on the subjective and totally personal level to be a light in a dark world, with the desperate, sad hope that reality will be just in the end because it is too unbearable to think otherwise. think about the grand inquisitor chapter and all those news stories dosto clipped about kids being abused. he was obsessed with it, no social harmony in the future would ever make the fact that it happened tolerable. that was God for him, a reaching hope that flittered between genuine beleif and despairing need. Like all saints and mystics and religious writers he had that femininity evident in his prose, he suffocated on the pain of others and his own depraved complicity in it, he needed a saviour beyond this world. that is what love was to dosto

>>17107822
Seeing greatness in human kind and its endeavour means you see man in a virtuous light. When you meet the blithering retards around you this image of a brutish animal becomes a blemish on your view of mankind as such. Of course, both greatness and weakness exist in humans, but what he's referring to there is this sense of repulsion for particular individuals, a sartre-nausea kind of thing.

>>17108399
Nice bait

>>17108154
This. Wasn't it a woman visiting Zosima? rings a bell

Loving mankind as whole means loving what mankind is capable of.
Not loving man in particular means being disappointed at man consistently failing to achieve their full potential.

Not that hard to get.

>>17108829
no it was zosima himself. he explains how he acquired the thought in the mysterious stranger chapter

>>17108154
i would agree with you if it wasnt for the fact zosima said this

>>17108901
>>17108892
its the woman visiting him, and later we see zosimas "confessions" about his past and it is repeated. he is clearly a different man in the present then he is in the past episodes, again representing the authors own youth and change in later life. They were both still religious when younger, but their religion was altered dramatically. zosima isnt a static character

>>17108921
to add to this, the elder literally chastises the woman for holding this view and repeats a similar sentiment that I have to her about loving the people daily in your actual life.

>>17108892
>>17108921
Looked it up, it's Zosima refering what a doctor said to him

>“It's just the same story as a doctor once told me,” observed the elder. “He was a man getting on in years, and undoubtedly clever. He spoke as frankly as you, though in jest, in bitter jest. ‘I love humanity,’ he said, ‘but I wonder at myself. The more I love humanity in general, the less I love man in particular. In my dreams,’ he said, ‘I have often come to making enthusiastic schemes for the service of humanity, and perhaps I might actually have faced crucifixion if it had been suddenly necessary; and yet I am incapable of living in the same room with any one for two days together, as I know by experience.

>>17108951
isnt this a theme for dostoyevsky anyway? More secular characters like ivan are disgusted by stories of saints tending diseased people but are passionate about humans in general. He is drawing a comparison between spiritual love and idealogical "love"

in a way, the religious hermit is in touch with society in the largest sense more deeply than any one man living within it. while the average man will live in his particular bubble, the hermit with his singular focus on meditation and study of his religion and its sacred texts is in doing so is immersing himself in Humanity in the broadest, deepest sense possible (at least as he understands it). i imagine dosto may have meant something like that, and i don't think he meant to express a dislike about his Particular Man, but simply that as Mankind proper comes into focus, feeling strongly about any particular man makes little sense any more

personally i'm with nabby though ie dostoevsky is a fucking hack

>>17108933
>>17108951
oh my bad all i remember was that zosima was the one said it forgot the context

>>17107822
Individual people smell bad, are angry, ignorant, deceitful and so on. Ideas are not. That's why it's harder to love actual people.

someone explain why there was a whole chapter dedicated to zosima's rotting corpse

>>17109099
If you don't understand it, I am not going to explain it to you

>>17108345
I swear you post here every single fucking day
dont you have anything better to do?

>>17109099
faith is not rewarded with outright miraculous events

>>17108546
The criticisms of contemporary society are very relevant, but what if the people are happy in the system they are living in? Even if there was a revolution, who's to say because of their own decadence things wouldn't turn around and become even more oppressive than before? Who's to say the chaos of revolution wouldn't lead to the most profound misery? Who's to say libertarian socialism is the only way - let alone the most effective way - to solve this problem? And who's to say in the process of fighting against the bourgeois we aren't actually fighting for them, simply reshuffling the card deck of power, and causing catastrophic misery for their sake? If revolution is denied normativity, what is left other than affirming education of youth?

>>17109549
The current trajectory we’re on, this already oppressive chaos, this already catastrophic misery, is leading to nothing short of extinction.
The general rightwing want further oppression to try to nab that golden past that never was, and the general leftwing want a program of freedom. What I lay out would not lead to oppression and avert catastrophe at the same time as give us a much needed change of life. Lower our energy consumption while continuing our technological advances. Unite us as we splinter off into a million democracies. The oppressive cantons of such a world would be the more “trad” religious sorts and their brave would abandon them for freer places

>>17109738
jej the only thing that's going to be uniting your "millions of democracies" in real life is a great conqueror. Christ you're so fucking stupid it hurts

>>17108345
you will never be a woman

>>17109774
>The world is exactly the same as it was in ancient Europe, bro. They’ll react the exact same way to a powerful strong man, srsly.
Dumb dumb
Napoleon? Hitler? So dumb.

>>17109847
wow yes humanity has ascended beyond people banding together for mutual benefit and and exerting power on other weaker communities, how could I have possibly forgotten?!?!?

fucking leftist intellectualism right here

>>17108368
You disgusting abomination. You deformed tranny. Horrible ugly filth.

>Give historical precedent
>Still can’t see he’s wrong
This isn’t the board for you

>>17109953
This isn't the board for you tranny

>>17109947
>>17109953

literally nothing you have posted proves that shattering the world into millions of micro communities wont leave those communities vulnerable to the rise of more powerful entities, or you know, more powerful entities that already exists and refuse to play your game

lel your so fucking embarrassed you cant even properly reply to me properly let alone with a statement with any sort of substance

>We don’t like facts and logic around here
>Books that tell the truth? Pff. Nice try.
Where’s the argument?

>>17109982
>get blown the fuck out by "fact and logic"
>bitch about how no one likes fact and logic

>>17109982
Tranny

>>17109973
Ah, here’s something.
So you’re scared of the weakness of large numbers of people resisting centralized chud armies.
We’ve always outnumbered them, but the organization hasn’t been there. I’ve never said it would be easy, in at least the beginning stage, but it’s possible and after a generation it would work such wonders no one would ever want to go back.
That too scares your sort.

>>17107822
Man is at odds with mankind of course. Though he should have just said man is at odds with all of nature. And no I am not talking about global warming to the dumb fuck reading this.

>>17110005
Tranny lmao

>>17110005
lol we arent talking about "large numbers of people resisting" though, why would you even post this? We're talking about large groups of people praying on completely helpless small groups of people

the fuck is wrong with you?

>>17110005
T R A N N Y
R
A
N
N
Y

>>17110027
I start to believe that the tripcode was really hacked, she was never THAT retarded.

>>17110027
>We're talking about large groups of people praying on completely helpless small groups of people
The interlinked democratic communities = large groups of people
The remnants of state-capitalism/muh warlards = helpless small groups

Remember. The dollar is going to tank. Who’s going to pay who a devalued dollar when the Direct Democracies have a better deal? I doubt any nation will outright invade (more likely import a little help to various factions) they’ll no doubt wait it out as we splinter apart. Safer and cheaper for them. But what madmen will want to turn the West Coast/East Coast rivalry into a nuclear shooting war? Get a grip.

>>17110058
Explain your confusion

>>17109549
>>17109738
Have you ever considered that the rest of the world isn't as unhappy as you are? What if people are happy in the present system? Who's to say your system will make them happier? Who's to say that you aren't just spreading your own discontent?
>What I lay out would not lead to oppression and avert catastrophe at the same time as give us a much needed change of life
This sounds like the same shit people said before the Russian Revolution. You don't know what the implications will be of a system until after the deed has been done. And also, who's to say that religions are oppressive? Couldn't you say people find meaning in religion, similar to how you find meaning in your ideology (which is religion)? How is your ideology any different from religion? If you're going to criticize the oppressiveness of religion I could just as easily turn that criticism back on your own ideology, which just sounds like one religion positing itself as absolute

>>17110098
Why are anons calling you a tranny are you a tranny?

>>17110098
Convince 200 Million Pakistanis to abandon their religion. Or 50 million Congolese

>>17110106
They’re nuts lashing out in hopes of hurting my feelings. They’re probably obsessed with dickgirls besides. No. Not a trans anything.

>>17110099
The rest of the world is verrrrry upset with the US, and most Americans aren’t so happy with the direction we’re headed. I don’t think they’re on the same page as me, but they’d like what I’m thinking if they heard it.

>>17110128
Idk you have a tranny temperament.

>>17110098
oh aah yes, it all makes sense now, so these communities are "interlinked" to form one big communities, and have some sort of pseudo feudal levy system where you're going to pull together a huge army from across this "network" of communities, and this army and this network will of course have to have some kind of oversight by an administrative class, and of course, to make this work, all these communities will need mutual rule system to keep everyone cooperating and on the same page to a to at least a minimum degree, and everyone will have to make their contribution to the collective administration in order to keep the whole thing functioning

>>17110121
First. Stall/reverse climate change
Second. Help them out of poverty and education
Third. Secularization sets in.
All we can do. Benazir Bhutto.jpg

>>17110099
The Russian Revolution was betrayed, btw. What we’ve got going now is bullshit and we’re all going to die in it.

>>17110140
Projection. I’m being quite calm about all these dumb non-arguments

>>17110164
No I am saying your beliefs are tranny type beliefs. You are a totalitarian of the creepiest kind, you want to alter entire populations and their beliefs, values and culture to reach a materialistic fairyland utopia. Good thing you will never be making these decisions.

>>17110164
Pakistanis don't care about climate change dumb tranny

>>17110164
Arguments like
>was betrayed
are exactly why your system will fail. As another anon said it's too weak, it will not survive because of game theory reasons. Then you will cry that it has never been tried, not realizing that a system that doesnt have the power to protect itself can never be a succesful system.

>>17110164
I love this, you accuse others of projection then you bring up non arguments even though you're the only one who hasn't actually put forward any sort of facts or arguments

>>17110099
>>17110128
>>17110164
>The Russian Revolution was betrayed, btw. What we’ve got going now is bullshit and we’re all going to die in it.
Who's to say the same thing won't happen again?
>The rest of the world is verrrrry upset with the US, and most Americans aren’t so happy with the direction we’re headed. I don’t think they’re on the same page as me, but they’d like what I’m thinking if they heard it.
Who's to say in the position we're in we can accurately say what "the rest of the world" is doing or what "most Americans" think. And even if we did somehow know, who's to say they would like it?
You haven't adequately addressed any of the questions I have raised, and considering we are talking about widespread social change, I can't take you seriously until you do

>>17110164
And into education *

>>17110157
Organized people from a free economy versus ex CIA, über patriot militia, neonazi whatever the fucks. A fraction of the population. Getting paid bitcoins that nobody wants to exchange with?

>>17110175
Ah. You’ve been told only trans are socialists. Pretty naive, anon.

>>17110188
I believe they do.

>>17110194
What projection was a I putting up? I put facts up and they’re ignored.

>>17110199
Yeah. It may not work, hu? Better stay at home, wear that mask, do as the new dictators say and wait for extinction event

Most Americans want Medicare for all and a UBI for at least the length of the pandemic. They get a $600 check tho.
We want a big change. Can’t deny it

>>17110212
>we need to give those backwards religious brown people a proper western secular organization :)
You are so racist omg

>>17110212
what facts have you put up?
>Organized people from a free economy versus ex CIA, über patriot militia, neonazi whatever the fucks. A fraction of the population. Getting paid bitcoins that nobody wants to exchange with?
complete word salad in order to deflect from the fact that you are doing literally nothing but reinventing the wheel and throwing the world into absolute chaos to do it. im sorry but your idea did not hold up to the slightest bit of scrutiny and your kind deserve persecution for what you are trying to put everyone through

>>17110239
Antitheism is love

>>17108345
>>17108368
>>17108399
>>17108418
>>17108462
>>17108488
>>17108546
>>17108587
>>17109738
>>17109847
>>17109953
>>17109982
>>17110005
>>17110098
>>17110128
>>17110164
>>17110212
>>17110238
>>17110243
Tranny

>>17110243
You are espousing white mans burden you fucking retard. Leave people alone they do not want your western world view forced on them tard. You do not know what is best for other people.

>>17110240
I’m not throwing the world into chaos.
It’s going there all on its own. I’m against protests even.
I propose self governance as the best and most comprehensive, yet freeing antidote to this chaos.
And no one’s been able to say anything but sour grapes and raspberries. They want a big handsome daddy to rule them. No?

>>17110243
Wash your penis bro

>>17110265
I think it would be more Iranian and Indian man’s burden, but China and Russia would probably help too

>>17110238
>>17110199
>>17110099
>Yeah. It may not work, hu?
So you want me to advocate for widespread social change in faith?
I've wasted my time raising questions which you have failed to adequately answer, I link them for anyone here reading this so they know how to dissect all of the errors you are making. I'm done with this thread because you are obviously bullshitting, your arguments are weak, you make leftism as a movement look bad. And I'm not a leftist either, but I prefer arguing with people who are coherent and don't just repeat the same errors over and over again, expecting them to somehow stick

>>17110287
Racist lmao

>>17110279
>I’m not throwing the world into chaos.
>I propose self governance
pick one

>>17110283
Never had one, Peterman bot

>>17110293
Things are worse than you think, anon. Shits unraveling pretty fast now

>>17110302
Regionalist

>>17110305
>Help us big daddy! Save us with your big strong veiny will! Woooo!

>>17110279
no one is giving you "sour grapes and rasberries" they're pointing out that breaking down the world into some sort of democratic pseudo tribalism is objectively unsustainable and you're just throwing fits and ignoring it

its like you're living a bubble completely disconnected from reality lmao

>>17110322
aah yes so these are those legendary facts and arguments you've been talking about

>>17110322
Merry Christmas crazy boy. Christ loves you know matter what <3

>>17108368
Kys already tranny

>>17110322
If i come to your house and rape you and your whore wife half to death and sell you into a long miserable life of slavery and take all your property, you might be a little more thankful for a little bit of collective organization that could have prevented it

let me guess though, you dont care about that, and hell you dont care if that happens to other people in pursuit of your fantasy, nothing else matters because you're dumb selfish woman incapable of critical thought and prove it every time you open your mouth

>>17110381
>woman

kek

>>17110329
>no one is giving you "sour grapes and rasberries"
Here >>17110350
I am proposing we drop the socioeconomic system that puts only the most sociopathic in complete control of the world. The non-market economy and the direct democracy solution would absolutely fix the major problems in this world. Your collective lack of imagination on this is distressing. The current system is unsustainable. A direct democracy would be perfectly flexible to manage all sorts of problems. It’s our best chance. Fascism or whatever it is you advocate will not address any problem.

>>17110381
>collective organization
...which is what I advocate. Hm?

>>17110429
Just drop it you are just hurting yourself

>>17110429
>or whatever it is you advocate will not address any problem.
Or present it. I’d like to hear it.

Butters' views are retarded but that isn't what annoys me the most. There are many stupid posts on this board but most people will say what they have to say, argue a bit and then realize that at some point noone will change their mind anyway and move on. Butterfly is the only one who shits up every thread, never questions her own beliefs, never provides any new, relevant arguments. A very weird type of autism.

>>17107822
Man's potential is far greater than man's behavior. He is disappointed.

Am I right?

>>17110436

>>17110445
What should I question?
What is the alternative?
“Tranny” that’s all they seem to have.

>>17108368
>>17108368
You, tranny, are a retard. Human behavioral biology and all of history shows you to be an uneducated idealistic fool.

>>17108488
Under a direct democracy eventually even the cows and chickens will be able to vote, effectively neutralizing any benevolent capacity. This has been understood since the times of the greeks.

>>17107917
fake quote, likely, but true to some extent. The leaders of the first Hungarian Socialist Republics were mostly Jews. Poland's Communist security apparatus after WWII was full of Jews. Austromarxism was spearheaded by Jews. Even yid authors not WN shitbags talk about this, Yuri Slezkine has a chapter dedicated to Jews and commieism in "Jewish Century".

>>17107822
My first impression is that he is implying that humans act with disregard for humanity in general.

>>17110429
>...which is what I advocate.
you're advocating for completely fracturing society and leaving it vulnerable to extreme chaos and violence, or are you referring to your plans for some sort of neofeudalism? either way you arent solving a single fucking problem that society faces, you're literally just recreating the conditions that led to the world as it is now

>>17108154
I think this guy got it right

>>17110429
>this one single person calling you a tranny completely invalidates all of the other actual arguments going on

holy FUCK why would you post this?

>>17110164
this isn't butterfly. He's never this combative and argumentative

>>17107822
>>17107905
>It is easier to be enthusiastic about Humanity with a capital 'H' than it is to love individual men and women, especially those who are uninteresting, exasperating, depraved, or otherwise unattractive. Loving everybody in general may be an excuse for loving nobody in particular.
>C.S. Lewis

>>17110503
Anarchism. And the people that come of that kind of world would not leave it vulnerable to the sociopaths of this world. A generational transition would happen, but besides that, there’d be so many standing in the way of warlordism... it just wouldn’t happen like that. The current statists hegemony is our biggest enemies. (Shocking how no one mentions them in their objections)

>>17110529
What
Spur grapes isn’t invalidating anything.
Are you high or something?

>>17110566
you said people are doing nothing but giving you sour grapes when people have been clearly arguing with you with a lot more honesty than you've given them, then you pointed to this tranny poster as evidence

>>17110566
>fracturing the world into small autonomous communities doesn't leave them vulnerable because well.... it just wouldnt happen like that

This is not a fact or an argument dumb dumb. women like you are why your kind were never taken seriously for most of history lmao

>>17110566
>Anarchism. And the people that come of that kind of world would not leave it vulnerable to the sociopaths of this world. A generational transition would happen, but besides that, there’d be so many standing in the way of warlordism...

lel. I unironically support this because I'm pro Ted K and want to LARP Children of Men, but this is wishful thinking. Lots of people are going to die and lots of warlords are going to rise. Think Bronze Age collapse or the period of Barbarian rule of Italy. History has enough examples of the opposite of your utopia. Maybe add in a little bit of cartel encroachment into the American heartland.

Might shall be what's right. Trannies and women shall be made to serve Alpha Male Mexican cock. The future belongs to the tough minded, ignorant, and heartless. The only use the brain of an academic has is to be splatter on the pavement as their wives and earnings are taken from them.

>>17110566
You know, forget what everyone is saying about warlike nations and stuff, what happens when the population of one of these communities just naturally outgrows its space?

>>17110598
It’s really strange how you can’t wrap your head around the truth of this. An iron grip has always left nation-state vulnerable. They collapse all the time. The more tightly held the sooner they fall apart.

The contrary is the strongest kind of society. You know that phrase “all power to the people” going with the upraised fist? The fingers, they represent the people coming together. Organized people. Getting what they want. Instead of elites and their security guards keeping a tight lid on everyone. Putting them in prison. Starting wars.

>>17110684
It can be bad, yeah. Doesn’t have to be though.

>>17110711
Sustainability would be a major issue. Peace, prosperity and women’s rights always brings the population down though

>>17110745
what truth is there for me to get? history and the nature of the concept of life its self has proven virtually ad infinitum that small communities are objectively more vulnerable to outside forces vs larger more powerful communities, I can say with complete certainty that there is literally not a single argument against this concept, you are objectively incorrect

>>17110795
>nature of the concept of life
> ad infinitum
Heh
> that small communities are objectively more vulnerable
Right. Which is why the remnants of a security state and a neofascist white supremacist group isn’t going to be able to hold out against a unified plebiscite. Holy crap when will you read?!

>>17110843
lol im so tired of you side stepping reality and refusing to face the actual topic at hand, answer the question outright, how is a neighborhood sized community not more vulnerable to military force than a full on regular nation state with its own military force? just answer the question, you have literally dont nothing but ignore it or give nonanswers

>>17110874
The military force. What happens to them once the dollar is devalued to shit? Once their families and communities begin to suffer so unspeakably they defy order from their commander in chief and head home?
And are faced with people taking control of their own lives?
What will happen when enough of them become one of us? And the only one of them left are picked off by their ex-comrades? Because the communities will have something to fight for. Something real. No corrupt lawyers, flags, pictures of bald eagles and that devalued dollar.
There’ll be a struggle. The majority ought to win fairly easily. The madness ought abate. Hard to tell exactly what will happen.
We may just slow walk into extinction, anon. What good is your military then? Answer that one.

>>17110920
LOL you still cant just answer the question . JUST ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION. Ill break it down really clearly. community A has 100 people, lets be generous and say 50 are fit fighting age males. community B has a population of one billion and a 2 million man standing army including nuclear arsenal, full airfoce and navy, mechanized forces etc

both communities fight, which one wins?

>>17110953
>can’t see the answer among the questions
Reading comprehension trouble.
That answer again. They’re Not as vulnerable as a minority of crumbling military infrastructure. If you can’t pay them, they start to question why they would protect the rich. Why would they rally around a black white and blue flag dictator? Who? Small minded warlords can be picked off.
Here I am doing your scenario work for you.
>community A and Community B...
Wrong premise. You’re running a Sim with the country with an intact economy and no unity established. Bad faith argument

>>17110984
LOL you cant answer the question because you are objectively incorrect, end of story, now you're just trying to change the rules of the game because you lost. so fucking pathetic that your entire world view an be completely obliterated by the most absolutely basic scrutiny

>lol
>lol
Bad faith arguments. Wall to wall. No one even offering an alternative.
Stop bumping and wasting everyone’s time

>>17111034
oh lord this obsessive projection on your part, you're the one giving answers like " It will work this way contrary to all facts and logic because i said it would"

you haven't made a single argument in good faith in this entire thread, youve done nothing but dance around questions and give non answers

>>17111034
anyway, answer the question, why is a tiny autonomous neighborhood less vulnerable to outside military force than a nation state of relatively equal military capability. YOU made the claim, its YOUR words in question here, now im asking you to clarify

an honest question deserving of an honest answer, so answer it

>>17111034
Kill yourself you tranny fucking freak

>>17110984
So what happens if they can pay them, like the overwhelmingly vast majority of nation states do?

>>17111079
she reminds me off matt berry, i can't see that pic and not think of him

>>17107905
Based.

>>17111071
>why is a tiny autonomous neighborhood less vulnerable
Because there are a LOT of them, for the third time in a row.
> of relatively equal military capability
Because soon the economy is going to go bust worse than it is now.

>>17111129
You need to look i to how the world’s economy works. It’s terribly complicated, but the essentially, the world trades in dollars. They’re going to ditch it once it explodes. The old system will be in a panicked crisis mode like no other. Who in their right mind would want to patch that shit back up when the alternative moves into place?

>>17111162
>Posts a Hobbit
I suppose you have one of those aquiline noses

>>17111191
oh fuck now she looks like sth out of dr suess

>>17111179
>Because there are a LOT of them
aah so we are back here then, you didnt answer me last time we went here. how does that work exactly, as far as logistics and administration go? how are you going to organize a response from millions of autonomous communities in time to provide manful resistance? who provides the supplies who decides how they are distributed? how is this army organized? is there an administrative class of some sort, be it a collective council or a dictator, both with the power to override the autonomy of every neighborhood? does everyone also give up their own autonomy to global rules for individual behavior to ensure everyone gets along? how is this not just a nation state in the making? or do you actually think millions of little communities without the resources to put together a single corp without any organization just wantonly attacking will be good? what if then enemy hits and depopulates a huge swath of these neighborhoods by the time your millions of communities can come together, and they've now simply dug in and decided they wont challenge everyone at once but simply take one bite at a time? what if there simply is not more of them? that's a pretty fucking huge assumption right off the bat that ive been willing to entertain your dishonesty regarding

>>17111300
>how does that work exactly
There are more of them.
Go count them.

>>17111330
how can i count them when they dont exist? also answer the questions

also I have one to add, how do these neighborhoods maintain and field extremely resource intensive projects like an air force or a carrier battle group that require collective wealth beyond what any one community can put together

>doesn’t believe there are people in the world outside his window
>Now answer my loaded question

>>17111464
how my questions loaded? im literally asking you to explain the most basic fundamental aspects of your beliefs, these should be extremely easy for you to answer

are you saying you dont even know the most basic fundamental functions of this belief system that your entire world view rests on? or is the problem that there are no answers to these incredibly simple questions because your world view has no actual foundation in the first place for you to explain?

>>17111464
>doesn’t believe there are people in the world outside his window
your entire argument rests ENTIRELY on the the fact that everyone thinks the way you do and everyone will fall in line and cooperate, you literally have no basis beyond that

you just cant stop projecting lol

>>17107905
Yes

>>17111528
What do people want?
The alternative I present actually has a lot of what a broad range of people want. A functional system for food, shelter and healthcare. Direct action. Self governance. They already believe they have a democracy, why not wipe away the crooks and choose ourselves? Why wouldn’t they?
A better system to replace the crumbling one. Why wouldn’t that be preferable?

>>17111681
>functional system
but its not functional, you cant even answer fundamental questions about how these autonomous communities maintain their autonomy, or what happens when they outgrow their allocated space. the shit your talking about is EXTREMELY far from being functional, you haven't even gotten the basics down yet

>>17111681
i want a strong state to provide for the people

>>17111744
>but its not functional
>that thing that hasn’t happened yet, but can easily be done because they ALREADY FUCKING DO IT UNDER CAPITALISM
Shut the fuck up

>>17111748
The people are the ones who provide for the state, moron.
Enjoy you $600

>>17111752
nah im not going to shut fuck, at this point it seems like you are lying to yourself ore than you're dealing with me. no, autonomous anarchist communes are not "functioning under capitalism". literally all you can do is deflect deflect deflect, maybe lie a bit here and there, and when your beliefs are put on literally the most basic, easiest to deal with scrutiny, all you do is sperg out and throw a fit like you just did. this is so fucking pathetic to watch, please god just reflect for a moment on how you're reacting here these basic questions. your ideology has no functional foundation, you cant even answer basic questions on how these communities maintain their autonomy or what happens when they outgrow their territory, literally the only answer you've provided in this entire thread is "it will work because everything will work out perfectly because i said it will work out perfectly" you have no foundation, you have literally 0 plans for even the slightest thing going wrong. your "beliefs" are so far from being functional, its like one big fucking joke youre telling not only me but to yourself to feel better because youre so completely closed minded and invested is the faggoty LARP youve got yourself into you cant just cant overcome the cost sunk fallacy

Anarchy inevitably leads to tyranny just as any other system. Ideology is itself the seedling of tyranny.

These words brought to you by a full blown anarcho-primivist.

>>17111872
So shallow.
Anarchism happens when the community takes charge of everything. It’s an effort but once set up it becomes extremely entrenched. It isn’t a tyranny. And only a tyrant with magical powers can break such minds and will of a people who have taken their lives into their own hands. You have to be one of those mind exploders from Scanners

I don’t really ha e the appropriate laughter face for this. Ridiculous

>>17111911
>And only a tyrant with magical powers can break such minds and will of a people who have taken their lives into their own hands.
or an army hundreds if not tens of thousands of times their size that can easily subjugate or exterminate them

>>17111911
You cannot escape ideology under any circumstance. Ideology is clearly affecting you very acutely. Do you know what ideology is? Fool.

>>17108154
This. Concrete love is not the same as universal love. To love someone concretely is to love them, to love universally is to love an idea.

>>17107822
you mean what did Ivan Karamazov mean by that?

>>17111950
No. It seems more like a war of attrition is their only option. Being a fascist’s slave isn’t something any American would stand for. They’d rather die. That’s the current mindset.

>>17111965
Or, their undoing is that we will never see them try to realize their freedom. They will revert to their Christianity, their GOP loyalty, their blind faith in some “progressive” movement etc.
maybe the glyphosate has warped their minds so far that they won’t break free in any meaningful way.
I’m realistic enough to be weary of this possibility, anon. This century may just be it for humanity. I get that. No sleep lost for it.

>>17112026
>Ivan
That was the elder Zosima talking about a Doctor he met in the past. Get a load of this Anon not knowing TBK by heart.
You're lucky it's Christmas Anon. Bless you and merry Christmas.

>>17112058
I was sure that's from the scene where Ivan Alyosha talk in the cafe. But it's a long book, I might be wrong

>>17112057
kek yea walking into your anarchist commune of a couple dozen people in the middle of the night and gunning them down or capturing them and transporting them to a concentration camp, or just bombing it from the air, is going to be a "war of attrition"

>>17108368
Idiot

>>17112057
look at how d-day btfo of nazi germany, one of if not the biggest dick in town at the time basically who had several whole armies organized trained and waiting for an invasion from that front. think about germanies invasion of France in the second world war.
imagine a d-day invasion of anarchist commune north america by a nation like china and, god forbid, their allies. by the time a planned invasion like that completely conquered the entire surface area of all the west coast states of america, systematically knocking out one woefully unprepared string point at a time, your precious commune of anarchist communes would just then be gathering their forces into various armies and getting them equipped and getting into the early stages of training and debating strategy. your numbers are irrelevant in that sort of scenario

>>17108084
Star Trek

>>17112786
1. Anarchists won’t fight like statists. They fight guerrilla style.
2. China isn’t known for invasions.

1. The main threat in the US is by obedient thugs, stupid obedient thugs who might still fight even after the money is worthless.
2. The secondary threat is the loose nukes. But don’t think the pleb anarchists would use such a thing. No, the losing statists would threaten to

>>17112857
>1. Anarchists won’t fight like statists. They fight guerrilla style
thats the point though , a huge systematic push could cut through them like butter. and your guerrilla tactics would quickly become irrelevant by the time any sort of organized resistance is established, and any attacker could simply take in the sheer quantity of raw resources that initial foothold could produce for them and dig in, or take advantage of your disorganization. even if you bet on an organized response, the attackers would suddenly be able to shift from offensive to defensive advantage while consuming huge quantities of raw resources they never had before
>2. China isn’t known for invasions.
this is based entirely on a hilariously limited post ww2 perspective, and even within that context, their power projection is limited by absolutely overwhelming power from NATO and not a damn thing beyond that aside from russia, and in that context they've conquered multiple nations, and beyond military action, they exercise extremely effective cyber, and economic warfare

>>17112857
I would like to cobalt nuke you ass

>>17107905
I think its the other way around. I love the individual but humanity as a whole is stupid and self absorbed.

>>17108154
Thanks for clearing that up fren. I hate when people quote characters and attribute it to the author. Paparazzi levels of honesty.

I'm really sorry butters but if you dont have the capacity to strike like a lightning bolt across the entire pacific you aren't even entering relevancy

If you dont feel anything for fyador you missed the point

>when you go to a fyador thread and prove correct everything fyador said about your own kind
based butters

>>17108368
I don't browse /lit/ often but I think I just found out why. turns out some people can read all the want but they'll never be able to analyze or deeply understand things a natural/intuitive level. your IQ is probably around 105; exactly dumb enough to be convinced you're smart. also tripniggers need to go back.

>>17109738
this is peak pseudposting, I'm honestly impressed.

>>17110558
Ouch. He's describing me to a T. Guess that happens when you're autistic and don't relate to anyone and want to save humanity. Just how it is.

>>17107822
I'm not sure if someone has mentioned this but the idea is a fundamental Christian orthodox (eastern orthodox) one, shared by our theologians, at least the good ones. If you want to know what he meant exactly I'd refer you to orthodox theology and philosophy from his time and influenced by it like Vladimir Solovyov (Dostoyevsky went to his lectures) or his journals.
But if you don't want to read books on the topic here is my interpretation as someone from an orthodox background: It is partly an attack on humanism and the love for the abstract idea of humanity and progress (D. probably meant socialism in particular cuz his politics lean reactionary) as compared to the personal love for a (probably horrible) person in front of you. Alyosha and Prince Mishkin are examples of the personal love that doesn't need an abstract idea of humanity to love people. For love trough an idea of what one could become under some guidance is not real love, love for the dirty and miserable and disgusting people is what he is trying to get at. A sort of decadency is present in that idea but that decadency is present in Christianity from the start.
Dostoyevsky is also a believer in the idea of Heaven on Earth, meaning the second coming has happened trough communion and it's up to every single one of us to love their peers as they love themselves. "Beauty will save the world."
Deeply poetic and beautiful but more and more that I gain experience in life rather than in books to me it seems all we can do is improve things slightly and the rest is to hope for a miracle.

>>17112057
you genuinely dont have a clue what ideology is, or for that matter human behavior

>>17107822
>enter dosto thread
>it's actually a buttertranny one

>>17107917
i domt know if it is fake or not
but dosto said something similar in "The Raw Youth" trough the voice of Versilov. I am not sure where in the book but I think in the dialogue Versilov had with Arkadi after Arkadi got upset and then left his parents's home.

>>17112884
>this is based entirely on a hilariously limited post ww2 perspective
No. It isn’t.
>this is based
Thanks.

>>17113022
Weird post. Have a (You)

>>17113338
Empty, long winded jab.
>IQ
Lol, as they say.