One of their core beliefs is that the colonization of the world and the intrusion of white people into the indigenous areasof other races, as well as the eurocentrism of the modern world, radically eradicated their culture and drove them into smaller and smaller parts of the world where theyr customs and culture are slowly fading and dying away. It is such an obvious statement to them that it baffles one to see how readily they are accepting of other cultures invading into the indigenous populations of white nations and repeating the same process, this time not backed by superior economy and military power but rather the well meaning of white people. Upon closer inspection however we shortly come to see that it is anything but contradictory. They believed in the superiority of white people so unwaveringly that it was impossible to imagine that white culture could ever be eradicated. This is coupled with an absolute dominance of white values and a morally completely eurocentric worldview which hinders them from viewing any culture around the world as anything other than: Less developed white culture. (1/3)
How modern liberal thought emerged:
This incapability to even imagine a cultural system which doesnt adhere to their own normative values as capable of surviving longterm in the face of their superior and more advanced ideological views of the world is still at the core of white liberalism. In their raw arrogance they cannot even imagine the idea of whites ever being marginalized. Ever truly being not in power. This delusion lulls them into an inescapable, yet false, sense of ultimate security in which they can never be exploited or at the backfoot of society, simply by merit of being white. To any rationally minded person this idea of absolute white superiority is laughable. Which is why they fear their own culture may indeed be capable of dying out. They are capable of not fearing terrorism and invading cultures because, at their core, the mere thought of the white value systems dying out is simply incomprehensible. Their behaviour akin to a child giving water and food to the animals in the forest. They can never hurt it, the child believes, and it is so vastly superior to them that it can comfortably and without any risk to itself enrich their lives as much as it sees fit. If you look closely at what their movements are doing you will soon have to realize that there is not one solitary idea within their movements which doesnt STRICTLY adhere to what we would, at their core, identify as white values. Those first and foremost include liberte, egalite and fraternite. (2/3)
A system of radical individualism and highest possible degree of personal expression and the ability to do so for anyone within the system. The very idea of freedom at that level is a completely and undeniably white idea. No other culture in the world went through so much war and misery for this one simple ideal of personal liberty. When they meet a new culture they exploit it for all the values that can be turned into white values and disregard the rest of it as if it didn't exist, completely denying those cultures any of their inherent complexity and beauty, solely to further their own ego and narcissistic tendencies. The important part however is that at their very core every single liberal is a raging and fervent believer in white superiority and white values. All that is needed to make a conservative out of a liberal is to show them how fragile and in danger our culture actually is. How dangerous and unsafe a place the world can truly be. And we won't even have to do a thing, since the world is doing the redpilling for us. Day by day they will become more aware of the impending collapse of THEIR values and as soon as they realize themselves not to be the undisputable and unconquerable masters of the world, but rather frail and endangered creatures who can indeed be hurt, who can indeed be enslaved, who can indeed die, they will flock to the strongest and most charismatic authroity figure of the right they can find at that moment.
TL:DR: Liberalism is a self solving problem which can end no other way but in the inevitable rise of white nationalism and, possibly, another genocide. (3/3)
We should try to accelerate the process as much as possible though, but to do that we cannot show them the inferiority of other races but the frailty of their own. They already believe all other races to be below themselves, this is not the red pill they need. They know of the savagery of other races and of the inferiority of their value systems, cultures and social structures. These things are a core believe to every liberal. What we need to show them is that we do NOT live in an unconquerable heavenly city in the sky. That we very much still trott the same earth as the others and that we can fail. That we can die. This is therefore a thread to discuss just that. How to best show liberals that they are not the godkings generously giving to the lesser races that they think themselves to be? I think we have a great opportunity here, because we could use ALL their vocabulary, infiltrate all their networks and they wouldn't even realize it. But it has to be done delicately or we might push some of them into even stranger believes. There is already a growing population of liberals who say they want white people to die off. We have to bring them in contact with their own morality without furthering such delusions.
Self-bump. Come on guys, this is important
Last Bump, will let die after
In some ways what we are seeing is the inverse of the propaganda that was fed to Europeans in the nineteenth century.
bumping
Modern liberalism is created by propaganda which is the inverse of the propaganda fed to the European masses which created the great European empires.
no it was made by the Frankfurt school and cultural Marxism
the long march - through the institutions
They're doing it out of revenge. Liberals don't care about promulgating European culture. They want to destroy all traces of it because karma.
Here is your problem. You used “Liberals” and “think” in the same sentence.
This is how modern liberal thought emerged:
>HURRRRRR HITLER WAS EBIL 6 MILLION GAS CHAMBERS HURRRRR
basically
I think you overestimate the degree to which a lot of leftists predicate their views on first principles. I think the vast majority of them have received stories (think tribal societies talking about "the great evil" and replace that with modern day bogeymen like racism) and internalized them so deeply, they project any and all problems in their life onto those morals.
So the reason they cry about white supremacy isn't because they actually believe colonialism fucked them in the ass (though some "educated" people might argue such) but rather, they perceive themselves at a disadvantage and, instead of admitting to themselves they're deficient in some way, they blame society instead, using their received stories to frame their struggle.
>Liberalism is a self-solving problem
I don't think it is. If it gets out of control, it can become a memeplex that takes down all of society with it. Look at places like Venezuela and tell me with a straight face leftists wouldn't do the same with their host countries if given power.
Learn to use line breaks please.
Bump
>tldr leftists are operating within a redpilled framework, though they don't realize it yet
I don't think it's that easy to convince them of the fragility of civilization. Look at any hipster with rich parents. They will go their entire lives earning a barista's salary just to prove their parents wrong. People can be very ideologically obstinate and the longer they believe in one ideology, the less likely they will switch from it due to sunk costs. No, you can't make a leftist "switch", but you can convince future generations that the left is retarded.
You are making some basic mistakes due to your insistence on whites being inherently better just like they do.
Whites didn't fought for personal freedom more than the Jews, that had to fight for it wherever they went in order to preserve their culture.
Change that and see where it goes.
learn to format your text you retarded nigger
also what leftists say isnt necessarily what they actually believe
Ya, so shills can come and hurr durr my thread about reddit spacing, fuck off.
I am not saying white values are better in themselves. i am saying these are white values and I PERSONALLY, prefer them. There is not a single line in there that calls for the erdaication of different normative systems. Which is actually the very basis to relativism, but was never consistently applied by those who invented it.
What I am trying to express is that these ideas of "the great evil" in itself is a western idea. That the idea of having to leave other cultures alone, is a purely western concept. That all the stories only work when predicated upon a system of actual white superiority.
>What we need to show them is that we do NOT live in an unconquerable heavenly city in the sky. That we very much still trott the same earth as the others and that we can fail. That we can die. This is therefore a thread to discuss just that
Just to add, this reminds me of a study I heard about recently:
businessinsider.com
Basically, conservatives turn more liberal if they imagine they have super powers. In general, the more robust society becomes, the more likely it will be able to sustain liberal thought. This is probably why a lot of silicon valley types are hyper liberal-- having no knowledge of the hardship many people endure, they think only of high minded leftist ideals and crow when we call their opinions trivial shit.
I don't think this is something you can change without undermining the prosperity of society. Any form of accelerationism as the NrX crowd loves to talk about will reduce the quality of life for everyone. The best thing we can do is dispel the self-harming propaganda being spread by these elites. Anything else would either be detrimental to society at large or would be beyond the scope of our power.
Actually the euro empire just wants to control the world n all the shit in it. Because techno advantage n desire for female. Females like lots of shit because desire 4 baby...big prob... N do whatever liberalism is female imbalance.... Colonialism is ma!e imbalance. Female imbalance will destroy shit the quickest... This bloated festering pig will pop soon.
My eyes are more important than reddit spacing shills' feelings.
>When they meet a new culture they exploit it for all the values that can be turned into white values and disregard the rest of it as if it didn't exist
faggotification of islam is the best example of this. where you're wrong, i feel, is the idea that liberal democracy is remotely at risk. whites as a race might die out, but all other cultures will be subsumed by this disgusting system eventually
reddit spacing isnt what i mean when i say format
That is why I urged for delicacy. I dont know if you are right and there are no means of accelerating it. But I think instead of showing the savagery of the muslims and blacks and whatever, it might be more constructive to focus on the victims instead. Giving liberals a stronger shock to their system.
liberal democracy is an abhorrent system and in NO WAY a white value structure. Individualism and liberty are not part of a democratic society in any way. Democracy needs to be abolished and replaced by whatever means of governance the local populus decides on instead of gating millions of people into democratic cesspools.
docs.google.com
White values are good enough you aren't the ones that defended personal freedom the most, you didn't fought more wars than the asians or the Indians, etc.
You are more people and just like you said internalized white supremacy blinds you to dangers and improvements.
>That the idea of having to leave other cultures alone, is a purely western concept. That all the stories only work when predicated upon a system of actual white superiority.
You know, as a minority who grew up around liberals and had to deal with their condescending bullshit first hand, I honestly believed affirmative action was nothing more than an extension of white man's burden. But as I grew older and researched its origins, I now think the people who came up with anti-colonialism theory didn't even think that far ahead in terms of its implications.
I think anti-colonialism has its origin in two places-- first is from practical observation of mixed communities, second is from Rawslian theory intermixed with Cultural Marxism. For the first point, consider how Roddenberry came up with the prime directive. His dad was a police officer and as he grew up, his dad observed that trying to intervene in ethnic conflicts often worsened the problems they were having. So from a purely practical standpoint, leaving those ethnic enclaves alone was better for both the enclave and the police officer. Which makes sense since there are a lot of hidden variables at play which aren't immediately evident to the outside observer.
For the latter, academia 1960's onwards was obsessed with Rawlsian veil of ignorance since it gave academics a way they could fix all of the problems in the world. The whole veil of ignorance is such a ridiculous concept that only works if you ignore intergenerational survival strategies developed by cultures over time and treat everyone as equal individuals. It assumes we are just atomized individuals who, through bad luck/good luck, ended up with disadvantageous or advantageous traits. It doesn't take into account the fact that some families/cultures have parents who sacrifice for their children and some families/cultures who don't.
(cont)
Believing this gives the naive leftist two things they desperately crave: one, a way to absolve themselves of the guilt for not living up to their parents expectations and two, it gives a grand historical narrative with a clear sense of good and evil, allowing you to save yourself the trouble of understanding life's complexities. Since clearly, the reason why colleges have an overwhelming number of students from two parent households (something like >90% at ivy leagues) is because of patriarchy and colonialism, not because some people never sacrificed for their future generations. And clearly, the one and only reason why different people would be unequal today is due to the fact they were oppressed by racism.
Point is, fixing something like this can't be dispelled by telling the leftist that civilization is fragile. For they don't even believe in civilization as a concept.
Their entire world is people as random individuals existing in a government that is chosen by the people.
This is a clusterfuck of a sentence. If you structure that into something comprehensible I would be more than happy to reply. What I do gather however is that you think white supremacy blinds us and hinders improvement, which is just a stupid notion. White supermacy, as a state of mind, is fine. Just like a chink thinking chinese superiority is where its at. it is impossible for one to live in a coherent social context of values and not think that ones own context is what you should live by. It becomes only a problem when:
A) you try to exterminate someone else for their inferiority, fail and get fucked yourself, or
B) you dont realize it is the framework you are operating under.
The only solution people would come up with in a rawlsian veil of ignorance is the NAP. Because you can not know beforehand if you are the only able bodied person in a society of cripples, which then would mercielessly exploit your labor to sustain themselves.
It appears you didn't dilligently read my text. because I clearly explained that I believe you to be wrong in this regard. They claim they want to abolish civilization, but are actually just constituting themselves in a set of normative judgements which are inherent to the very civilization they are in. They think everyone will be happy once white patriarchy is destroyed because they innately believe that the idea of personal liberty and so on is an overarching idea of all people and all cultures. Once they are shown that their own set of values can collapse they will shriek from it as anyone would.
But the way to do that is not to show them how white values are actively being destroyed because that only feeds their narrative of oppressed minorities freeing themselves from oppressive rulers. But rather to show them the fragility of THEIR OWN society. How to achieve that I am not sure.
Think I misread this statement of yours:
> When they meet a new culture they exploit it for all the values that can be turned into white values and disregard the rest of it as if it didn't exist, completely denying those cultures any of their inherent complexity and beauty, solely to further their own ego and narcissistic tendencies. The important part however is that at their very core every single liberal is a raging and fervent believer in white superiority and white values
I assumed you were talking about colonialism instead of liberal interaction with other cultures. Yes I do agree that the modern leftist mind is built upon the axioms of Western thought and those axioms contradict their professed beliefs about anti-colonialism and whatnot. But my issue is that this inherent contradiction (between western individualism which underscores their entire existence and Marxist collectivism, which is their stated belief system) doesn't matter to the leftist because they simply don't think about the world in these terms.
Self-consistency is not a strong suit of the leftist. Emotions are everything. This is why you will never win an argument with a leftist, if they are losing, they will simply plug their ears and chant whatever mantra to drown you out. The fragility of their society, hell, even their own individual position does not matter to them because they are not future-thinking people. The future is an alien place to them. Whether this is due to some inherent disability or some perverse choice to avoid thinking about the unpleasantries of life varies from person to person. But all leftists seems to avoid thinking too hard about the future and what might be lacking.
In fact, that is probably the most defining quality of a conservative over a liberal-- conservatives believe man is a fallen creature and the only path to salvation is to make up for this lack with hard work.
wall of text crits for 9000, super effective
Learn to read leaf. If your idea of political commentary is witty one liners you do not belong in a political discussion. Eat a dick.
I might have focused too much on the liberal and shrouded my main point there. A grave mistake on my part. The hardline liberals are beyond redemption. But the mindset of about 80% of people who do NOT believe in conservative values or at least do not identify themselves as such, those might be changed. Those we might be able to redpill in a quicker and more efficient way by redpilling them on what they actually dont know, instead of propagating what they already believe in their heart of hearts but fervently deny despite all the evidence pointing the opposite direction.
Correction: I do think there are future thinking leftists, just not highly ideological ones. The soft-leftists, say the socialists who live in cities that resemble the idyllic 50s suburbs in Leave it to Beaver, are intelligent forward-thinking people who simply live in a reality bubble. They feel guilty the world isn't more like their bubble and so they labor to try to turn the world into their world. This is colonialism, ironically enough.
As for the dirty hipsters who live in cheap housing and work at Starbucks, they will never acknowledge western civilization as a positive force, despite predicating their entire lives upon it.
So if you want to convince the left, you'll have to take at least two different approaches or maybe just pick one group and hope they influence the other. For the rich, silicon valley types, you'd have to convince them their dream is unrealistic and that their bubble is fragile. For the hipster types, you'd have to do something more emotional-- make them realize that a lot of their beliefs are folly in the face of reality through real-life examples.
You stated that white supremacy blinded liberals, I just agree.
>Those we might be able to redpill in a quicker and more efficient way by redpilling them on what they actually dont know, instead of propagating what they already believe in their heart of hearts but fervently deny despite all the evidence pointing the opposite direction.
The key to this is expanding the range of acceptable dialogue. Right now, the left has such a stranglehold on discussion, it makes intelligent discussion on issues impossible. Look at how James Damore was pilloried by Google for handing out purple pills at best. In order for the Overton window to shift, the first approach should be to open up discussions on a variety of subjects with hard evidence.
Language control/modulation is also a huge tool which the left has used for the last 50 years to gain cultural ascendancy. Complex concepts require refined language for the brain to get a handle on them. This is why jargon exists. In order to convince the 80%, it might be necessary to come up with more succinct terminology. Something easily digestible, like the term "red pill".
Hmm, to have an honest discussion with a libtard; first you have to cut off his ability to retreat. The best way to do this is; chuck him in a concentration camp.
Buuuuummmpppp
I'm reading this website: cambriawillnotyield he' eviscerating liberalism there. Man, I wish I could write stuff like that.
Are modern liberals negro worshippers? Do they really think that these people are better than them?
No. As I explained in my post (maybe read the thread before posting) they are viewing themselves as their saviors. Or at least, that is at the core of their ideology. Talk to them, they will tell you how they went to africa and taught little niglets and stuff. How they made the world "better". All the while ignoring that they are not qualified for teaching white children. But those are niggers right? Of course I can teach them. I am from a superior culture, from a superior educational system, from a superior people. This savior complex then started to spiral out of control into self denial and negro worshipping, but it is not what is at the very ROOT. They simply can NEVER admit to their actual ideas, so they have to go along with the worship.
Good effortpost Hans
What is really happening in Europe? Liberals want to impose their vision of a perfect society on Europe(whether Europe likes it or not) and become really annoyed when reality does not match their vision. However, it has been asserted that the real objective of the creators of the European Union is to replace white Europeans with half-breed mulattoes and that unintelligent liberals are tools facilitating this plan.
>How modern liberal thought emerged
bump
I think it's less about whiteness and more that they believe that liberalism is an inevitable outcome of human history. They can point as far back as the Magna Carta - individuals wresting power from a sole King - and trace a line all the way through the Enlightenment, the French and American Revolutions, the liberation of slaves, the defeat of fascism, the development of an interconnected globalist society, and the loosening and erasure of conservative social mores as technology evolves.
To them, the only future they can envision is a liberal one. They don't view the right wing as a threat; rather, they just see conservatives as impediments to "progress." Hence their frustration - in their eyes, if only conservatives did not exist, the world would be a utopia.
What liberals have trouble comprehending, as you've laterally addressed in your post, is that enormous dangers do indeed lie along this path. Liberalism is the ideology of reckless, foolhardy courage, birthed from the feeling of invulnerability that European intellectuals felt after the Enlightenment. They are right that the human race is capable of achieving greater and greater accomplishments, but they are wrong to believe that such things are inevitable and that they should be done without caution.
Think of conservatism as the voice of reason, the word of caution, the critique, easily ignored by someone who believes he knows best, to his detriment.
The Magna Carta; annulled by the Pope almost as soon as King John signed it.
Good thread. I noticed this but didn't give it more than a passing thought. Navigating the hood with liberals here in Detroit was enough to set off this response within them. I took it as a false signal, thinking that was their open mouth from which I could shove a redpill. But really it was within them and they didn't want to gaze at it for
Long
>making the intellect of man the father
>the negro(noble savage) the saviour
>science the Holy Ghost
The true trinity that the liberal worships.
I'd suppose that Europeans must regain the faith that made them Europeans. If libtards hate it; it must be right.
Basically, liberalism is a mental problem; having lost faith in what made them Europeans; they must believe in something, anything that makes them virtuous and the people they once were: the epitome of evil.
Is it possible to salvage anything from the coming wreck of Europe?
globalist agenda gets pushed to all the millenials and once they paint a clear target and started their Neo-McCarthy slander if anyone is against their target they can push whatever cancerous ideology down their sheep throats
Of course. It's called the liberal bubble for a reason. They don't exist in the wild without a wealthy nanny state to cover for their endless mistakes.
Ever see "the Cruel Fate of Kekistan" by the Murdochs? It parodies quite nicely the stupid beliefs of civic(mad-dog liberals) nationalists.