/lit/ - Literature

>>20534562
Breathtaking image

>>20534562
You just know that twittertard is a shia dog

>>20534784
>t.sunni swine
Part and parcel

>>20534562
What a stupid thread.you need some more explaining do you? Here it goes again. You feed and encourage a madman who threatens to kill you and he will kill you someday thinking nothing of the kind treatment. Okay? You don’t need another book for that.

>>20534783
It really isn’t.

>>20534562
Popper’s The Open Society and it’s Enemies
Fag

>>20534812
>It really isn’t.
Kys summerfag, Floyd allegedly suffocated with a knee on his “neck,” you 30-IQ ‘tard

Friendly reminder that the popper comic liberals post to explain why killing nazis is good, actually, is a blatant misrepresentation of his position on tolerance.

>>20534823
>Summer fag
>Calls me summerfag
Go join Ukraine

>>20534952
Suck start a Carl Gustaf, little miss summerfag

>>20534827
It shows the paradox. Does it force a conclusion?
The existence of nazis shooting at you and your loved ones forces it often enough. I don’t care what Popper says

>>20534812
liberalism does it does because it stands for nothing. nazis and jihadists do what they do because they stand for something. what you want is to transform standing for nothing into a positive moral position worth killing for, which is in itself Satanic

>>20534991
Fascism is liberalism in decay. They all stand for the same thing in the end and that is subjugation of the soul, the freedom and chaos that the deranged man feels he must control

>>20535029
liberalism is negative liberty, fascism is positive liberty. you're not good at this overly deep polemic thing you've got going on

>>20535047
>fascism is positive liberty
Kek. State authoritarianism and centralized economy is freedumb!
>YOOU not good at this!
Schizo-dip

>>20535029
materialism is the worship of the hylic, thus Marxism is demonic

>>20535086
do you even understand what negative rights and positive rights are?

>>20535047
>liberty
what a fuckin spook

>>20535100
Who in the hell brought up Marx or Gunon bullshit here? Fuck off.

>>20535106
>Reeally! Fascism is this stuff that it never is!

>>20534562
Liberalism is simply a bad ideology if it can't sustain its principles

>>20534562
Of all the niggers for that cop to kill, he had to pick the one with the absolute biggest fucking lips

>>20535208
They kill em all the time. This one was made an example of to cover over the labor movement developing. Which is still kind of going on. Starbucks and Amazon are getting poked. Probably would have been bigger had there been no arranged “riots”

>>20535086
>Kek. State authoritarianism and centralized economy is freedumb!
why are you going to expose yourself as a retard. do you know the difference between negative liberty and positive liberty? or are you too coombrained to get the idea of limiting yourself now so you can do something better later

>>20535351
>It wasn’t real fascism

Liberal, please.

>>20535559
now you’re just saying random schizo stuff

>>20534784
May Allah curse the Rafidah.

>>20535779
Hm. Maybe you could try saying anything sensible. You just keep dropping little taunts that only make sense to you. Like bird shit.

>>20535107
t. Canadian

>>20534812
>You feed and encourage a madman who threatens to kill you and he will kill you someday thinking nothing of the kind treatment. Okay? You don’t need another book for that.
but anon, then why do you subsidize black people?

>>20535029
>Fascism is liberalism in decay
fascism is the fulfilment of socialism which is the fulfilment of liberalism
Always funny how socialists skip out that middle step of tis genetic/axiomatic relationship

>>20536222
they only sound like gibberish to you because you're barely literate and you have the arrogance of ignorance to immediately dismiss things you don't recognize. positive liberty and negative liberty are well-established concepts in political and ethical philosophy. you can read about it here: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberty-positive-negative/

>>20534562
>Twitteroid who speaks perfect English
These "people" do not speak for us.

>>20535029
Fascism is just socialism in one country.

>>20536645
>but anon, then why do you subsidize the cops?

Ftfy

>>20536651
Marx split the first international when he debated Bakunin.

>>20536682
Fascism is well documented
>>20536690
>socialism is when the government does stuff

>>20536758
enforcers are a branch of government indispensable to governance since the first proto cities. monopoly on violence and all that
I ask again,
why subsidize madmen who lack the capacity to be grateful if that's paradoxical

>>20534814
>>20534827

>>20536849

>>20534562
>paradoxically
Society and culture collapsing because you freely allow people into it who hate you and your ideology and actively try to replace it isn't much of a paradox.

>>20536870
>freedom of speech was great when it allowed the petit bourgeoisie to overthrow the nobility, but if we let you use it to overthrow us, it is... le bad
this wouldn't even be a point of contention if you weren't the descendants of revolutionaries and proud of it, but now using completely unprincipled enforcer brutes at-will and mocking your enemies for it, you civic-society freak

>>20536841
And I have asked the same. Why subsidize madmen?
Indispensable to oppression of the masses? Monopolies on violence as a good thing?
You are a degenerate halfling, child.

>>20536849
As it has turned out, the censorship has come from the rightwing, disguised as lefties. Rejoice to all ye fascists, for Biden is your man

>>20536879
That's all well and good, but it's time for you to turn around and face the wall now.

>>20536890
No, I think I'll enjoy the fruits of immigration to the West while bitching about you anonymously and also laughing at you for civil unrest and geopolitical fuckups

>>20536889
>Indispensable to oppression of the masses? Monopolies on violence as a good thing?
Authority is a fact. You can try to subvert it but never to deny it

>>20536900
*shoots*

>>20536781
you probably haven't read a single document in your life you illiterate troon

>>20536900
So you wonder why there’s sufferers getting little scraps of fake help in order to keep them in a state of desperation and to keep racist elements frothing at the mouth with jealousy. It’s as much a fact. The state does this shit for a reason. Wow, you’re dumb. Typical bootlicker

>>20536913
100% off the mark.
Shouldn’t you be out trying to shoot Russians?

>>20536916
Butterfly?

>>20536916

>>20536924
I haven't even talked about what I believe in. Not like it matters. You're such a fucking retard that you probably thought that my use of the term "positive liberty" meant that I was saying that it was a "good" liberty.
>hint: Marx was for positive liberty too
Not like you're going to understand anything. You're just another dime-a-dozen Breadtube contrarian with zero intellectual depth.

>>20536928

>>20536940
You’ve yet to say anything at all. True.

>>20536781
The Internationals have very little to do with defining socialism as a whole except from the internal perspective of communists and especially orthodox Marxists

>>20536841
Modern, professional police are a very new phenomenon

>>20536935
Yeah, the most prosperous labor camp in history and it treats itself slaves poorly. Feeds them crap. The poor can only afford the least healthy foods. Rewards middle class kids for being dutiful dead inside drones that are extremely invested in the success of their nation’s grift that they never question it even when they know the media is lying to them.
“Civilization” is for a few undeserving elites, sociopathic mass murderers, commanding a vast bureaucracy of politicians, numerous security guards robots who will kill at a moments notice, or even independently if he sees someone jaywalking

>heroic medical care
That too is a grift. She will never e able to pay off those bills and they didn’t even liposuction it. Yeah. Sick sad world. We don’t have to live like this. We just have to kill the nazis droids before they kill us.

>>20537005
And he loves them so!
He’s got a black white and blue flag, I’ll bet.

>>20537005
I used the broader term "enforcers" for a reason
It covers men-at-arms, retainers, and bondsmen of all time periods
It also includes the modern regimented police of course

>>20537015
The West isn't bad because it's elitist, it's bad because it's paradoxically egalitarian, meaning that undeserving plebs rule in business and academia due to the rule of finance, while the average person lives like a complete hedonist in a manner neither efficient nor purposeful. If anything it isn't elitist enough.
Conversely, elitism is necessary and inevitable in organized society. The fact that you either don't see this or just deny it is why groups of people like you get paved over by civilization.
If you read Gilgamesh you will see the primordial city of Uruk being referred to as Uruk-the-Sheepfold because everybody has always known the masses are akin to stupid livestock with no potential or real ambition. Populist rhetoric along the lines of "we just want to be left alone" is a sign that the common person has an inflated opinion of themselves and that control must be reasserted

>>20534562
You clearly haven't read either of those books because if you did then you would realize that those same "western values of tolerance" are meaningless contradictory bullshit that you have no reason to defend.

>>20537066
>it's bad because it's paradoxically egalitarian
So, it’s actually good in your eyes. Because it ain’t.
Done talking to you now. Your head is deep fried in patriot sauce. Stupid robot.

>>20537084
>patriot sauce
Patriotism to what, the masonic golem experiment of decadent oligarch hypocrites?
That's all it's been from start to finish
Long Live King George III (is what I'd say if England was a respectable country)

>>20537117
Oh. Le unmoored nationalist monarchist. Papist?

>>20537123
half serb with a massive chip on my shoulder
I have principles but not any coherent ideology, nationalist is right though

>>20537142
Unmoored and wishing for a cage. Oh well. I hope you can change into something nicer someday.

>>20535047
If you redefine the very meaning of freedom...

>>20537180
freedom... to do what?

>>20535167
It's not so much bad as it is unstable. I requires effort. One those who've known the absence of freedom will gladely make, but their decadent children will think they no more need to strive for it as they do a sunrise.
You can argue that makes it inferior, but anything better than despotism will eventually fall victim to human nature.

>>20537175
>alienated and wishing for stability
That's right, the world is unhinged and suffering for it
you don't have to know what's wrong with you in order to die

>>20536841
>since the first proto cities
Even tribal chief had his loyal warriors. No city needed.

>>20537194
>One those who've known the absence of freedom will gladely make
name one regime that actually fell due to the absence of freedom

>>20537066
>meaning that undeserving plebs rule in business and academia due to the rule of finance
What makes them less deserving than say, the grandchildren of warlords?
>we just want to be left alone" is a sign that the common person has an inflated opinion of themselves and that control must be reasserted
It sounds like people not sharing your hunger for bootleather really chaps your ass.

>>20536935
What's the best country to flee to? Tired of all these screeching fatties. Japan?

>>20537188
Any goddamn thing you choose, so long as you can still feed yourself and aren't fucking people over in a way that normies have been able to stop others before you from doing.

>>20537208
Colonial America?
Haiti?
Charles the I of England?
Or do you need me to find an example where a government has somehow sucessfully supressed a population and still been overthrown by it?

>>20537236
and what if I choose to restrict my freedom now so I can have more power (e.g. more freedom) to do other things later? besides, what's with this moralistic judgment about fucking people over? sounds like a lot of arbitrary restrictions on my freedom.

>>20534562
>are there any good books explaining why tolerance of extreme groups and beliefs actually can paradoxically undermine western values of tolerance?
your common fucking sense and critical thinking skills, which you'd have some of if you weren't a perpetual fucking midwit, kys

>>20534952
>too stupid to get the "breathtaking" joke and calls someone else a summerfag
dilate

>>20537285

Haiti is a good example since it was a literal slave revolt.
But the other two illustrate the point I was alluding to. It wasn't about freedom. In Colonial America it was entirely instigated by the local elites to gain privileges that only benefited them, and in the case of Charles I it was ultimately because his measures to counter the country's bankruptcy after the Thirty Years' War caused instability in Parliament which he failed to manage. Insofar as religion was involved, none of the sides involved were interested in real freedom of religion, the Protestants used this as a bad excuse to enforce their own new uniformity.
As a rule, regimes fall because one elite segment sees an opportunity or a reason to destroy the status quo.

Freedom spread as a rallying cry as the agricultural economy of the feudal period grew ever weaker compared to the mercantile sector, and the agricultural elites lost out to the mercantile elites. The mercantile elites were able to use liberty as a justification for the expansion of their privileges relative to the nobility. They appealed to classical ideas as well as the Anglo-Germanic customary laws and protections for freemen which went on to form the basis of common law.
In the feudal system, the military and agricultural elites were one and the same, therefore, they were doomed to military defeat after the change in economic emphasis. The same thing happened in the one other arguably feudal culture in history with the opening of Japan. Notice that the justification there had little to do with liberty despite the Western entanglement of the imperial faction and was essentially about Japanese honor in the face of the world.
Getting back to Europe, this situation actually happened in Italy much earlier and less gradually, for similar economic reasons, leading to republican city-states like Venice and Pisa which were very apparently oligarchical. Most of these republics fell into autocratic lordship quite fast because their institutions were not strong enough to maintain order and legitimacy. The vague notions of classical values were famously "reborn" in the Renaissance... which, in its aspect of political theory, consisted of scholars paid by oligarchs to scour Greek texts brought by fleeing Byzantines after 1453 and hack together a justification for their rule. That solidified republicanism, which nevertheless suffered further blows with the Plague and Ottoman shutting of trade routes... with a reorientation towards the agrarian economy. The shift in trade northwards is seen as a key factor in the reversal of fortunes between North and South Europe, solidified by industrialization and colonialism.

I should add, if you define freedom just as "X class in some society was restricted from doing what they wanted and revolted", instead of a concrete principle like liberty, you are consolidating the idea that these are pragmatic power struggles, and it comes right back to authority.

>>20537199
The world is suffering by the squeezing of an iron fist. I wouldn’t describe it as unhinged, but whimpering. The technological state and globalist agenda just let loose a global pandemic we’re not supposed to investigate or question their cure.

>>20537646
Stupid faggot, an iron fist would have been able and willing to do any or all of:
>implement china-style restrictions for actual containment
>build hospitals and train emergency staff to actually treat patients while forcing industry to reorient production to accommodate this
>not cripple healthy people through isolation and gaslighting for the sake of old and sick husks already on death's door
instead they told you to go hug a heckin chinese person and vote out drumpf for fearmongering, then lost their shit for two years while attempting to socially-pressure people into taking vax like a bunch of gossiping women, and of course vote out drumpf for not doing enough to stop the pandemic.
For all the police action the course of the pandemic in the West was waged in the court of social opinion, in the most passive-aggressive and gayest way imaginable
>investigate or question their cure
It is not the role of the general populace to think about anything beyond subsistence and manual labor, they aren't qualified. They're barely qualified for that, even, they're forced to be, on pain of homelessness and hunger. The people currently in charge aren't qualified either, sure, and that's because they're essentially these same upjumped normalfags, out of their depth with no intellectual standards to speak of, put through once-prestigious schooling at long-eroded institutions on dogmatic arbitrary criteria, whose idea of strength-of-character is having a prestigious therapist on speed-dial
Basically this is what happens when higher education becomes a thing for every jane and joe off the street

>>20534562
The popper thing is literally 1 footnote

>>20534562
Liberalism hasn't failed yet, but if we don't impose it, it will. Paradoxically, to save democracy we must ban the republican party and become a one party system. If we tolerate fascism, then people will end up voting for it until they have all the power, because fascism is more attractive to the average voter than democracy, even if they aren't aware of it or if they don't recognize it as a fascism.

>>20536889
>Rejoice to all ye fascists, for Biden is your man
Kek when a retard thinks he's in an action movie

>>20537569
Surprisingly good post. It's refreshing to see this kind of analysis on /lit/, actually—too many people here divorce ideologies from their historic and sociological foundations.

>>20534562
>tolerance of extreme groups and beliefs actually can paradoxically undermine western values of tolerance?
When has there ever been tolerance in the minds of the western elite. After Hitler, the Communists were not tolerated, and after that the Middle East and after that Russia and China again. When was liberalism tolerant? Don't liberals know that their intolerance and hubris is what lead to terrorism and reaction of liberalism in the first place? The sheep doesn't know this, but the snake and the lion know that to be tolerant is to die. And as it is human nature to strive for survival, ask any person, and every person is intolerant to something in some capacity. And it is a fallacy to think we are any different to those civilizations before us.

>>20534562
>George Floyd memorial
>in Syria

>>20539857
There was an article that tracked all the floyed murals worldwide. Some of them were paid for by ngos.

>>20540230
Sauce of the article? This is really interesting.

>>20536685
Who is "us"?

>>20541838
Ligma balls

>>20542543
ligma deez nutz

>>20540863
>>20540230
double it

>>20534562
>western values of tolerance
Tolerance isn't, or wasn't, a "western" value and life was better when people didn't tolerate evil.

>>20534562

"Tolerance" has always been exclusively "tolerance" of bourgeouis liberal values, in the same way that "free speech" has only ever been the right of bourgeouis liberals to impose their values on the rest of the social structure. The Vendee, the Terror and the murderous indifference of early capitalism are the real face of liberalism.

>>20534562
I would argue you're looking at the wrong question. The questions I would start with is: "why are liberal democracies so successful?", where success is defined by (relatively) very low levels of scarcity for essential goods, low levels of violence, state monopoly on large scale use of force, generally high economic and political freedoms, strong property rights, and (comparitivly great but far from perfect) rule of law?

Or, why do very few people emigrate from liberal democracies? Why do they have such higher per capita earnings, and why do they have such (comparably) powerful militaries (NATOs capabilities for complex air operations and % of hardware modernized vs Russia, Israel vs the Arab states up to the Yom Kippur War despite similar flows of aid from the Soviets to the Arab states, Japan vs China through the early 2000s)?

Because the question of "why do liberal states offer so much political and economic freedom to individuals?" is deeply tied to what makes those states successful on those metrics.

Pic related is an excellent work that seeks to answer those questions. Why some states are high functioning and others aren't is the focus of the first volume. It's a great work not so much for the original insights (they are good though) but because it summarizes the state building literature from Plato, to Machiavelli, to Weber, to Guns Germs and Steel, to Why Nations Fail?, to modern trends in polsci and econ, and does a fair assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of each.

The second volume gets more at the specific problems of liberalism today (IMO in a better treatment than the two books you mentioned), but the first part is more essential to understanding the problem.

>Inb4 "history didn't end lol"

Not that book, not that thesis. Fukuyama is too original to be pigeon holed as a conservative anyhow and most of the critics of The End of History don't understand it.

>>20543981
Forgot the pic.

As for The End of History, it's worth reading the article version or just the intro to the book. It has some good ideas on the success of liberalism and the idea of progress. This mostly comes from Fukuyama simply restating Hegel in more accessible and modern terms.

The problem is that he has a bad misreading of Hegel. In Fukuyama's telling, the dialectical worked like this:
>Liberal democracy comes on the scene way back with the birth of the USA and the French Revolution.
>It is victorious over monarchy as a system.
>However, it faces two strong challengers: socialism and fascism.
>A dialectical conflict ensues and both challengers ultimately collapse under their internal contradictions.
>Democracy emerges as the one serious form of governance with a claim to legitimacy. It succeeds in offering people recognition in a way no prior system could.

This is not how the dialectical works. Socialism and fascism emerged due to contradictions in liberal democracy. For instance, you get "socialism" from "the social question" which came up right after the "political questions" of elected government, constitutional rule of law, and the end of the mobility as a special legal class. The next question is: "how can the common people rule themselves if they are overwhelmingly illiterate, uneducated, and barely living above subsistence and dependant on landlords and factory owners to survive?" That is, "the public is too dumb to rule itself and too dependant on elites to cross them."

Enter socialism to address these issues. Socialism in the form of Marxism was the most successful brand of socialism in terms of revolutionary success, but other types did better electorally.

What Fukuyama missed is that Hegel's dialectical predicts that the "winner" in the contradiction will sublate the loser and take its definition on into itself. Liberal democracy did this. Universal education is now common in all liberal states, as are child labor laws, rights for unions, welfare programs, government healthcare (even the US does it for poor people and Boomers), etc. Liberal democracy sublated socialism to eliminate internal contradictions.

The second thread is nationalism/fascism. This was sublated too. We talk of a given people electing their own rulers. No one would think it would be legitimate for the US to annex Iraq so long as it let the people vote in US elections. Modern legitimacy, even for lefties, is defined by a given people choosing their rulers.

So now liberal democracy simply faces new contradictions. For instance, support for the welfare state is undergirded by a common national identity. What happens when mass migration undermines this identity? Legitimacy rests with a people. How do you address global issues, collective action problems (e.g. global warming), when legitimacy is held locally?

>>20544038
The rapidly shifting information environment is a new contradiction. Data undergoes selection pressures. It gets reproduced if humans like it.

But humans don't like data because it is true (at least not necessarily). They like data based on their feel feels. We see this in /pol/ infographics that are fake but get copied over and over anyhow.

Writ large, what you get is a rapid selection cycle where the data available to make political decisions follows a sort of path dependence that pulls it further away from representing truth and more towards representing fitness for reproduction. Essentially, entering the digital age took our data environment from that of a poorly managed, but nonetheless managed petri dish, to a full fledged ecosystem, where selection pressures have full reign over what data is reproduced.

>>20544058
>>20544038
>>20543981
So what comes next in light of the new contradictions?

>>20544073
Who knows.

Probably new sources for identity, much stronger global governance (perhaps only after significant crises), maybe a global sort of welfare state to stem migration.

But potential advances in AI and humanity's ability to edit its own genome could radically alter the future. Already, our use and collection of data is growing at such a high rate that it will eclipse all current uses of energy combined in our lifetimes. People greatly underestimate the energy use required to make super low entropy systems like hard drives. But Coin alone is using the energy of a small country.

With this is mind, I've seen some people posit an eventual "bio revoltion" following the digital one. Why? Because there is this huge demand for all this smart technology but it is amazingly energy hungry. Meanwhile, the nervous systems of insects a orders of magnitude more efficient per calculation than the best computer chips. DNA is more robust and survives far better than digital memory storage devices. It also can hold an exobyte of information per cubic ml. It's orders of magnitude better as a storage medium.

Companies already have working DNA data printers, although this is still the R&D stage. We have successfully printed books and jpgs to DNA.

Basically, billions of years of evolution has left vastly more efficient computational and storage tools all around us and we just now are getting the tools to use them. Computation wise, this works too. You already have some examples of "hybots," robots that use animal neurons to operate.

The shift here wouldn't be minor. Not just better technology we already have. You could fit the entire 2016 internet in a shot glass of DNA. A human brain runs at 100 teraflops and and be run for a decent chunk of time off of a nibble of a chocolate bar. So, like I said, a multiple order of magnitude jump in capabilities. A better data storage and computational power just makes finding out new things even easier.

>>20544038
>The problem is that he has a bad misreading of Hegel.
Isn't that the problem with anyone who comments on Hegel?

>>20534562
isn't it just basic politics? any regime needs to suppress its enemies. a liberal regime needs to suppress an antiliberal movement just like a communist regime needs to suppress an anticommunist movement

>>20534562
I honestly find funny how some liberals actually believe that any minority they think they are protecting is also liberal.

>>20544480
b-b-but schmitt said...

>>20544464
Well, yeah. He can be read many ways. However, in this instance it's a particularly bad summarization of the basics of how the dialectical works. Fukuyama had ideas coming up, fighting it out, and a winner emerging. This is more of the original Greek dialectical.

Hegel's dialectical is all about one side of a contradiction sublating the other, coming to encompass it, and the contradictions arising naturally from the definition of things, not by people proposing counter arguments as in a classical dialectical.

Basically, he does Hegel's psychology for the struggle for recognition, but then swaps in a classical dialectical for ease of use, but it ends up hurting his analysis.

Still, Fukuyama's parts on "Last Man" syndrome we're 100% spot on and describe 4chan, particularly /pol/ to a T.

>>20544038
How can one man be so right about everything?

>>20535123
apparently not. negative rights are "freedom from" and positive rights are "freedom to"

read, asshole

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rights

>>20544038
>>20544633
it wasn't even a "dialectic". the countries that backslid into authoritarianism had no democratic institutions or history of democracy, that's all it was, just like how after the french revolution, no democracy took hold, while after the american revolution it did. idk how a professional academic can have such dumb takes, unless you are getting filtered like that guy who thought nixonland said marcuse caused "the 60s" to happen when it fact it said the opposite.

>>20544038
>>20544058
are you the anon who said you were writing a paper on hegel and fukuyama about a year ago? would be interested in reading it

>>20534562
If gas prices are still over $5 by July 4th, many will forget about Ukraine.

Why tf did they paint this graffiti in fucking Syria of all places as if that country doesn't have infinitely bigger problems to deal with? 100% this was done by some westoid journalist or some shit. I bet every Syrian shia, sunni or Christian who walks past that would just roll their eyes

>>20545642
FYI the person who posted the pic in the OP image is an Arab leftist who is complaining about Syrian rebels rejecting the mural. Leftists want this shit even though it’s cultural imperialism

>>20534562
This looks like propaganda
A way to use initially internal divisive themes as a way to.unify against external.enemies

>>20544073
Nothing yet. Liberal democracy has persisted as the dominant system of the world since the dawn of modernity by devouring its competitors. Marxism has only managed to survived in a select few countries like China by participating in the global market, and all other forms of socialism are so intertwined with liberalism that most people can barely distinguish them. We are stuck in purgatory.

I think most people today like to say that liberalism is unraveling and that America is on the brink of collapse, but this just isn’t true. America is still the most powerful country in the world and more people are liberalized in 2022 than ever before because of social media. The truth is simply that modernity and liberalism are unfulfilling. Liberalism is successful but life within liberalism is depressing and destructive. We’re closer to the last men than we think.

>>20546267
And to anyone who disagrees, I want to ask, why haven’t we been able to think of anything past liberalism? If liberalism is unraveling then shouldn’t we already have a rigid outline of what system will replace it? The most we have are socialist policies that most liberal countries already have (healthcare, public transport, social welfare) or conservatives telling us that life peaked in 1991 and we just need to keep everything the same as that year instead of the “woke” nonsense that exists now. What other alternatives are there for liberal countries, violent Marxist revolutions carried out by scrawny transgender leftists who are scared of guns and use twitter all day?

>>20546325
US democracy is definitely in decline. An election was blatantly stolen. Elites are blatantly replacing the native population with pliant serfs from the third world, tanking our birth rates with porn and vidya and drugs and Tinder hypergamy degeneracy.

We have a legit show trial on network TV every night where never Trump RINOs lie and lie to discredit the one man who tried to save the Constitution.

Thankfully it won't work. Patriots have woken up. The Rubicon will be crossed if they try to steal a landslide again. The Kali Yuga is upon us. Weak men make hard times, hard men will make good times again. The age of the warrior rises.

>>20546437
>muh Trump
>muh Constitution
>muh revolutionary fantasies
ngmi

>>20546437
If this isn’t bait then you’re just one of the retarded conservatives who want the world to be permanently 1991 like I said. Thanks for demonstrating my point that none of you can think of anything that isn’t liberal democracy. Your support of Trump is based on the idea of “saving” liberalism from corruption after all.

>>20546457
Wrong, Trump transcends liberalism. He is an apex predator. A man with the athleticism to get recruit by MLB and the genius to not only make billions from a small loan, but to outsmart the entire elite system and crush them in an astonishing victory.

Liberal democracy is a degenerate sham. The new era will be a congress of warrior equals, each self sufficient, working for righteousness.

We won't have popular elections, popularity contests for leeches after.

>>20546458
You only even know of Evola because Bannon, a sage of Trump, elevated him into the consciousness of the world. Nothing in Evola contradicts Trump; he is a fellow aristocrat of the soul.

>>20546603
You don't know what you're talking about. Read more books.
>Bannon
Bannon wanted to desecrate an Italian monastery so he could train, in his words, the future Nikki Haleys and Kike Pompeos. You're deluded.

>>20546655
You think Evola would have given a shit about Italian monasteries?

>>20547028
he certainly wouldn't have made their goal to train neoconservative grifters. unless you're comfortable with more Mike Pompeos lol.

>>20547048
I doubt Bannon even likes neokikes in all seriousness

>>20547080
don't kid yourself. he does their bidding

>>20534562
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/countering-radical-right/what-tolerance-and-how-much-it-do-democracies-require/

>>20537569
>>20539639
American elites revolted out of self interest but that doesn't mean their ideology was all a cynical facade. They wanted to live in a world with more liberty, as they defined that word. So they revolted to get it. If it was a pure power grab they wouldn't have made such a big deal about how citizens need to keep guns and shoot tyrants even after gaining power.

Bruckner is under-appreciated

>>20547475
You don't think liberalism is a facade? How can you believe that when liberals themselves admit it in all their books?

>>20547490
Why didn't you respond to the question of why they attempted to decentralize power even after gaining power?

>>20534562
Can’t wait till the far right are dragged out of their parents bedrooms, raped and shot

>>20547506
They didn't decentralize power, they just lied about it. That is the entire point of liberalism, deceive the masses with values of tolerance and individual liberty so that they can become placated into mediocrity. Elites have the power to censor, legislate and execute anything they want. The liberal system is basically just a giant PR department that makes people think this stuff is hard to do because we need to participate in a democratic process first. And if you're using guns as an example of allowing citizens to revolt, why do Americans revolt and riot the least out of any major country? They only pick up their guns when they're shooting up schools and riot when a black guy gets shot, that's it.

>>20547481
Title's got me hooked. Care to give a brief summary, anon?

>>20547535
None of what you're saying has any relevance to the fact that the original government was set up to minimize centralized power. If you have power and want to keep it at all costs you tell people to give up guns. You don't shill guns as hard as humanly possible. You don't set up multiple branches of government for the specific purpose of cucking anyone from being able to do anything.

>why do Americans revolt and riot the least out of any major country?
>i think the state of modern america is an argument in support of my position for some reason
It's not but I'll answer anyway. Because americans have more freedom and generally live with rules that more closely align with their own beliefs due to the state system. Which is the result of the decentralized nature of the constitution. Despite the fact the constitution is being eroded it's more than any of the rest of you have and that's why your governments do things like take away your outdoors privileges until you riot hard enough.

I'm not arguing that democracy isn't rule by propagandists. Yeah, it's the shittiest form of government except all other types and I'm not sold on that last part. This has nothing to do with the point which you're running away from. Once again making that point explicit: When in power the founding fathers did not act in a way which maximized future power. So clearly that was not their actual goal. It's really not that unbelievable that powerful people can still act with some degree of ideological motivation. The fact that they were already powerful doesn't somehow imply that all their goals were 100% realpolitik.

>>20547605
I'm not saying that liberals don't actually believe in their values. I'm saying that the true function of their beliefs isn't always for them to truly materialize in the real world. In modern times, liberals support their ideology for pragmatic and economic reasons more than for virtue. The Founding Fathers certainly had more conviction in their beliefs than just as a vessel for power but even those intentions faded away pretty quickly over time as America came to be defined by capital and contradictions started piling up to the civil war. Liberalism already collapsed once before in the early 20th century, it can happen again if the illusions start to falter.

>>20547475
Look up the Whiskey Rebellion
In short, just two years after the first federal election, there was a rural populist rebellion opposed to the new federal government's taxation of whiskey which disrupted the frontier economy, and George Washington personally overruled the strong majority consensus that this rebellion should be forcefully quashed.
As in, most of the Founding Fathers did an about-face the moment they were the top dogs

>>20547921
So what you're saying is they didn't get what they wanted as a result of the decentralized government they set up.

>>20534562
since the original question is extremely boring and cringe lets go off topic
>western tolerance
>western guilt
none of modern western values are western, they are all foreign to the west
there is nothing western about the west today

>>20547969
this is an equally dumb topic because most aspects of modernity are uniquely western especially liberalism

>>20547940
They actually did get what they wanted, the rebels fell in line with the federal position based on Washington's individual charisma.
They didn't get to fuck the poors as hard though, entirely based on that same charisma.
if you want to talk about systematic effects, then you have to address why the Federalists won beyond their wildest dreams with the evolution of America, based solely on implicit systematic incentives, despite losing on the explicit front

>>20547475
The elites lost their elections more and more often. The GOP has the inmates running the asylum. Yeah, elites keep control, but barely. Regular middle class crazies who worship Trump are increasingly the power base for the party.

Hence "hang Mike Pence," and the coup attempt.

>>20534562
What "western values of tolerance"? If the west really values tolerance so much why are they always going on about how hard they have to fight for it?
I think the hard truth westoids don't want to face is that you don't get to value individuality and tolerance at the same time. That just isn't how things bear out in reality which is exactly what the last century should've taught you.

>>20534823

You can't be asphyxiated from force applied to the back of your neck lmao, and the front of his neck was not pinned to the ground. If anything, drugs, being winded from the struggle, and the fat chink cop sitting on his back is what killed him

>>20548134
>The Whiskey Rebellion demonstrated that the new national government had the will and ability to suppress violent resistance to its laws, though the whiskey excise remained difficult to collect. The events contributed to the formation of political parties in the United States, a process already under way. The whiskey tax was repealed in the early 1800s during the Jefferson administration.

>>20548134
Their equivalents won even harder in every other country. That isn't something inherent to the original system. If anything it's something inherent to humanity.

Our young generation is clearly lost man. Clearly lost.

>>20534562
Breathtaking image

>>20534562
Read this
http://www.4pt.su/en/content/liberalism-20

>>20548134
It's all a Free Mason conspiracy anyhow. I grew up down the street from the Springfield Armory. The actual site of Shay's Rebellion is right down the street from there. What is there now? A Burger King ("king," monarchy).

I went to the battlefields of Lexington and Concord on a school trip, to the actual sites of the battles. In BOTH places, a Burger King. Saratoga battlefield, turning point of the "revolution?" Burger KING. Graveyard I saw with graves from the Battle of Brooklyn, across the street, Burger King.

Coincidence? I think not.

bump

>>20536889
I want to fuck your sister and so do you.

>>20553318
Whoever looks on a woman to lust after has committed adultery with her already in his heart. Repent coomer.

>>20537229
the afterlife unironically

>>20546267
It's unironically Klaus Schwab who is doing most to develop a new system that resolves the internal contradictions of liberal democracy.

>>20553469
In the great reset, his plan was things liberals already push for like green energy, some form of ubi, race and gender equity, esg scores.

>>20534562

"Nihilism: The Root of the Revolution of the Modern Age" by Fr. Seraphim Rose is relevant to what you want.

It talks from the perspective that Nihilism is the affirmation of the position: "There is no absolute truth." Liberalism, therefore, is a phase of Nihilism in which it holds no truth to be absolute, but it affirms vague values such as "the human spirit" or "freedom", while ignoring the fact that there is no way to keep a hold of these beliefs, since everything is permitted to be believed, since there is no absolute truth.

https://www.docdroid.net/SlxAMji/nihilism-seraphim-rose-pdf#page=4

>The Liberalism we shall describe in the following pages is not--let us state at the outset--an overt Nihilism; it is rather a passive Nihilism, or, better yet, the neutral breeding-ground of the more advanced stages of Nihilism. Those who have followed our earlier discussion concerning the impossibility of spiritual or intellectual "neutrality" in this world will understand immediately why we have classified as Nihilist a point of view which, while not directly responsible for any striking Nihilist phenomena, has been an indispensable prerequisite for their appearance. The incompetent defence by Liberalism of a heritage in which it has never fully believed, has been one of the most potent causes of overt Nihilism...

>The Liberal still speaks, at least on formal occasions, of "eternal verities," of "faith," of "human dignity," of man's "high calling" or his "unquenchable spirit," even of "Christian civilization"; but it is quite clear that these words no longer mean what they once meant. No Liberal takes them with entire seriousness; they are in fact metaphors, ornaments of language that are meant to evoke an emotional, not an intellectual, response--a response largely conditioned by long usage, with the attendant memory of a time when such words actually had a positive and serious meaning...

>No one today who prides himself on his "sophistication"--that is to say, very few in academic institutions, in government, in science, in humanist intellectual circles, no one who wishes or professes to be abreast of the "times"--does or can fully believe in absolute truth, or more particularly in Christian Truth. Yet the name of truth has been retained, as have been the names of those truths men once regarded as absolute, and few in any position of authority or influence would hesitate to use them, even when they are aware that their meanings have changed. Truth, in a word, has been "reinterpreted"; the old forms have been emptied and given a new, quasi-Nihilist content. This may easily be seen by a brief examination of several of the principal areas in which truth has been "reinterpreted."

>>20537015
Blacks aren't slaves. Most don't even work. They don't pay medical bills. They have no need to pay for housing.

You are coping for your dumb ideology. You will never have the opportunities available to blacks. You won't even learn they exist without serious effort on your part. But there are armies of white social workers who fill out all the forms for dumb blacks which get them on all the assistance programs that give them a life of leisure and relative luxury.

>>20536856
lol, did ben really drew that ?

>>20536889
>As it has turned out, the censorship has come from the rightwing, disguised as lefties. Rejoice to all ye fascists, for Biden is your man
I fucking hate Americans
Imagine writing this cringy shit with zero self-awareness. You will whittle away your pathetic life and die remaining exactly like this. Grim thought.

>>20553322
Tell it to Benny.

>>20553907
There are two types of people who say this:

1. retarded literal boomers who were born in the 1950s and only watch Fox
2. political disinformation agents
3. trolls — but not as many as you'd think

Type 1 really isn't on 4chan.

>>20554370
Type 1 is definitely in 4chan. On Facebook I see Boomers sharing tamer /pol/ memes all the time and talking about it in transparent "code." The_Donald was full of Boomers posting about going to /pol/ and how to fit in. Who do you think is still posting in the multiple bump limit President Trump Generals years after he lost? Who do you think makes up the base of Q?

Every newspaper article on the core Q membership features 50-75 year old women for interviews.

Obviously a lot of partisanship could be resolved by simply not using the first past the post, closer primary system that works to make the most radical politicians the only choices in the general election. You get Republican governors in Massachusetts and Democratic ones in Kentucky, like right now, because the primary base is insane. Instant run off, ranked choice voting would mean instantly electing way more moderates.

But more than that, I've realized, working with more older people and watching my in laws and parents approach 70, that old people lose a ton of cognitive capacity and increasingly have the cognitive skills of teens and then children as they age.

So clearly, given the fuck ups of Biden and Trump, we need an amendment saying a President can't start a term if they are 62-65 before their first day in office. We should do this for Congress and the courts too. Right now we have had over a decade of rule by people past retirement age. McConnell is 80. Fienstein is 90 something and took out papers for another 6 year term, as did the senior Senator in Iowa for the GOP. The leader of the liberal wing? 80. Trump is old as fuck and there is no way you can watch videos of how he spoke in the 1990s and how quick witted he was, versus some of the word salad he vomits out now, and not come away thinking he is in serious cognitive decline.

Trump's entire cabinet averaged 64, and Biden's isn't much better. There are plenty of talented citizens aged 35-65. We do not needs scores of 70-90 year olds running the country.

Hell, I'd even go further and say that Boomers can keep the UBI and free universal healthcare they get (Social Security pays out way more than Yang Bux, and they have Medicare), but when they take it they lose their right to vote.

Right now just the Feds do $38,400 in transfer payments per senior per year, this after they slashed taxes on themselves during their working years and handed over $23 trillion in debt, which is essentially a 100% GDP transfer payment where they got shit they wanted and young people pay for it. Maybe then we could fix bridges and roads and global warming instead of pouring trillions down the gullets of Boomers each year.

BTW, I don't even favor getting rid of student debt, but it's hardly the "largest wealth transfer in history." Annual transfer payments from the working generations to Boomers each and every year is significantly larger than all student debt combined.