What is your ideology?

What is it that your serious, most earnest self believes in?

I believe in the Individuum. There is no collective brain. You alone have to make decisions based on logic and not trust others to do it for you. Your self is a set of value, a potential how to make it in the world. You mustn't be selfless and don't have pity, because that means you're doing something for your own disadvantage. You betray your set of values, your ideology and your "self" (=selfless).

Collectivism has caused socialism, the problems of immigration, the lgbtq-thing, censorship, decline in character and consequently the cultural decadence.

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=DapNJOXBx2M
youtu.be/WAUj-xObLoI
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_socialism#In_practice
anyforums.com/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

This thinking has also led me to some interesting conclusions about race and racism. Race, unlike what the german wikipedia wants you to think, is real of course. Where differences are there come different positions in hierarchy. To say whites are better than blacks is true in the aspect that they have created a far greater civilization but the most useless and dumbest white person is not smarter than the most intelligent black person. Now, the only way you could be a supremacist is to say that the genetical potential of a white person is always better than the one of a black person, which you would have simply no evidence for. The logical conclusion would then be that you are an individual and race-realist who wants to live in an uncompromising meristocracy, which would be multi-racial. I see that there is the argument that humans are naturally tribe-thinking and therefore function better in an ethnostate, which would also eradicate the potential of a slippery slope into a multi-cultural world which we have now. I don't know what to think.

I honestly don't find much things wrong with collectivism on a small scale.

That being a small enough scale for those involved to have meaningful relationships. I think where collectivism falls apart is when you're supposed to give a shit about people you've never met

Become the overman.
m.youtube.com/watch?v=DapNJOXBx2M

>Individualism

Cringe.

Community is key, but collectivism is hell, anyone who dares to step outside that line of thought is condemned.

You disregard the role of nurture too much. If whites are taught since they're kids that their potential is great in all areas of study, art, science etc., coupled with a culture that praises and encourages hard work, you'd have very few if any whites with low intelligence. It doesn't matter that there are niggers who are smarter than some whites, these niggers have no business in white countries.

Nietzsche advocated individualism for the ubermensch

he fundamentally believed the ubermensch should realize themselves, rise up and implement a new aristocracy on the "all too many" (what he saw as the commoners)

I believe this is all a massive practical joke that nobody is in control of. Everything is basically completely absurd

This doesn't mean that much of reality isn't horrifying or beautiful, it is, but there is just no logic to it, we evolved the way we did, and then civiization sort of accidentally happened, and it is all completely ridiculous. Pretty much everything we think is delusional

The only question is why are we conscious at all, why is there something watching this comedy unfold.

What drugs are you on leaf? Stoo taking them. If everything is delusional, nothing is delusional.

You still libe in a collective though, one must not be too selfish, since you are far better off in a collective that respects you, than by yourself against other collectives.

Anti-Marxism.

I believe rooting out and destroying the sick ideology of Marxism, and ensuring it never rears its ugly face again, is the most important thing in securing a future for Europe. Aside from that, I edge towards individual liberty, but have to compromise it when it comes to Marxism.

>based on logic
That's where you go wrong. The virtuous man ought to act correctly as a matter of habit rather than deliberate every occasion in his own mind.

Well, that they did I suppose. Not sure they embody his ideal though.

Not at all, the ubermensch was patrician by pol standards

he would be a warrior, a scholar and at his core a leader

what we have today (or at least close to it) is the last man

"The last men are tired of life, take no risks, and seek only comfort and security. Nietzsche warned that the society of the last man could be too barren and decadent to support the growth of healthy human life or great individuals. The last man is only possible by mankind having bred an apathetic person or ethnic group who are unable to dream, who are unwilling to take risks, and simply earn their living and keep warm."

it's kind of interesting how accurate he was back in the 1890's

>collectivism has caused....
Well you're not wrong.

Faith and family. Everything else is secondary.

My ideology doesn't have a name. And it's too complex and contradictory for one regardless.

Epicureanism
Do what makes you happy.
Moderation is better for longterm happiness.
Friends are one of the best things in life.
Exercise your right to free association and do whatever it takes to keep safe from violent peoples.
The non-aggression principle is a good idea.
Science and empiricism are the best tools for understanding the world.
There probably aren't any gods.
The universe is made of atoms.
Death should not be feared or embraced.

almost everything*
Evolution explains why we actually exist, it just paints a very different picture than the one our cultures have historically had and continue to have.

Nobody really thinks intuitively of their life the way an evolutionary perspective would dictate.

Pure Americana!!!!

youtu.be/WAUj-xObLoI

The shills have soyrage!!!

It seems epicurean-ism and cynicism are very similar.

Individualism has stripped westerners of camaraderie with their fellow man. I think this caused the problems such as immigration, the lgbtq-thing, censorship, decline in character and consequently the cultural decadence.

I believe that in a civil liberty sense individualism is the core to a functioning and prosperous society. But when you loose the moral collectivness (i.e.Christianity) you loose the mortar that holds the wall together.

>Now, the only way you could be a supremacist is to say that the genetical potential of a white person is always better than the one of a black person

It sort of is in a sense. Intelligent blacks will produce progeny that regress towards the racial average (which is 15-30 points below whites, depending on if you are talking African Americans or Africans). So the genetic potential so to speak is actually worse for blacks in a way.

The Cynics were another school of ancient greek thought.
Another were the Stoics.
They all have some merit to them. From my reading Epicureanism is the most logical and consistent. Both the Cynics and Stoics start with a claim that humans should act 'virtuous'. They both try and describe what virtuous means. Epicureanism instead says man is just a fancy animal and should do what makes them happy. Through empirical evidence Epicureans come to the conclusion that avoiding pain, good things in moderation, and to be surrounded by good friends is what makes humans happiest.

The problem with Epicureanism is that it has a difficult time dealing with pro hedonist arguments. In a lot of ways it's the Greek version of Buddhism (or vice versa).

I don't care about "isms" but I definitely admire Neitchze's justification of existence in Aesthetics.

Epicureanism has always been accused of hedonism even though Epicurus specifically states that over-indulgence results in misery. It the 56% meme form of disinformation attack.

nIetzsche is the most cancerous philosopher I've ever read. I once spent a week binging Nietzsche and afterwards I felt worse physically, emotionally, and spiritually then I did from a week long drug and alcohol bender

>Nobody really thinks intuitively of their life the way an evolutionary perspective would dictate
Wrong. The mere idea of betterment and learning is rooted in evolution. The fact that parents want their kids to be better off than themselves is evolutionary in nature.

The ideal would be a society free of most of coercion where private property rights would be respected.
YET (and it is a big one), the materialistic, greedy ideology that implies such a system must not be tolerated. The result would be feudalism I guess

Here is a quote from the communist manifesto (the only part that is worth reading) that describes exactly what i cannot put it in words :

"The bourgeoisie, historically, has played a most revolutionary part.The bourgeoisie, wherever it has got the upper hand, has put an end to allfeudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations. It has pitilessly torn asunder the motley feudalties that bound man to his “natural superiors,” and has left no other nexus betweenman and woman than naked self-interest, than callous “cash payment.” It hasdrowned out the most heavenly ecstacies of religious fervour, of chivalrousenthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism, in the icy water of egotistical calculation.It has resolved personal worth into exchange value, and in place of the numberlessindefeasible chartered freedoms, has set up that single, unconscionablefreedom—Free Trade. In one word, for exploitation, veiled by religious and politicalillusions, it has substituted naked, shameless, direct, brutal exploitation.The bourgeoisie has stripped of its halo every occupation hitherto honoured andlooked up to with reverent awe. It has converted the physician, the lawyer, thepriest, the poet, the man of science, into its paid wage-labourers."

A mix of modernity and feudalism would be marvellous

Im trying to land this Communist qt, so I read Notes From Underground because she suggested it. I think the only shittier book I ever read was The Stranger.

la citation en français cher voisin suisse (si tu le parles bien sûr) :

"La bourgeoisie a joué dans l'histoire un rôle éminemment révolutionnaire.
Partout où elle a conquis le pouvoir, elle a détruit les relations féodales, patriarcales et idylliques. Tous les liens variés qui unissent l'homme féodal à ses supérieurs naturels, elle les a brisés sans pitié pour ne laisser subsister d'autre lien, entre l'homme et l'homme, que le froid intérêt, les dures exigences du "paiement au comptant". Elle a noyé les frissons sacrés de l'extase religieuse, de l'enthousiasme chevaleresque, de la sentimentalité petite-bourgeoise dans les eaux glacées du calcul égoïste. [...] La bourgeoisie a dépouillé de leur auréole toutes les activités considérées jusqu'alors, avec un saint respect, comme vénérables. Le médecin, le juriste, le prêtre, le poète, l'homme de science, elle en a fait des salariés à ses gages.
La bourgeoisie a déchiré le voile de sentimentalité touchante qui recouvrait les rapports familiaux et les a réduits à de simples rapports d'argent."

>being this wrong

he was literally the great philosopher of modern western civilization

you probably didn't understand the metaphor

idk if you get what I mean. From an evolutionary perspective morality for example is just a meme. What actually exists are feelings of empathy, and these exist primarily between organisms that share the same genes, and between organisms that can expect some level of reciprocity in their dealings, while subject to game theoretical constraints.

'love' goes more or less the same way. It necessarily means that human society in general is an accident basically, composed of people mostly trying to fuck each other over.

It also has a lot of implications for our concept of truth, and, well, everything really.

There is honestly not that much philosophy in this vein, it's like most philosophers have just ignored that Darwin existed at all

Lgbt, and other character-rotting degeneracy, is caused by too much individualism. How could you somehow get that so completely backwards?

This

Notes from Underground is Dostoevsky, who is fucking based. Everybody likes Dostoevsky

Karamazov is by far the best

This. The real answer is to have individuals who are part of, and pay heed to, a collective that cares about them, and their future.

I'm reading notes from the underground right now. You hate it because you know someone who is like the underground man.

Are you kidding?

He's right

the education system of most western states is horrible. People have no aspirations of greatness any more, rather just interested in their own pleasure.

I didnt mind reading it so much, it kept my attention. But I do not think it refuted utilitarianism well, and the narrator was utterly cringe worthy.

good 'ole Right Wing Populist Nationalism.

I think everyone can relate to spite. But being completely consumed by it, is not the natural human condition.

Because he hates the tree but is still conditioned to love the root.

I don't think we're meant to agree with the narrator, I think he is a depiction of a contemporary sort of man. The Russians have a bunch of books like that.

Dostoevsky was religious as fuck, so the perspective of the underground man is really not his.

I don,t really like that book either though. Again I highly recommend the Brothers Karamazov

Christ faggots embrace globalism and think anyone who embraces Jesus can all live together. It's fucking terrible and destroys civilization.

Epicureanism specifically says to do whatever it takes to keep yourself and your friends safe from others. Epicurus even calls other peoples "beasts" and says some nations of people aren't able to live by the non-aggession principle.

The truest, most basic reality which were all must confront is that there are literally people who want to delude the world into thinking that race is socially constructed, and it is therefore good, natural, or inevitable to extinct whites.

What? The underground man is a verbatim Dostoyevsky.

I mean for fuck's sake that whole book is an obvious autobiography.

Best book ever btw. Seriously.

Yeah you're right I don't get what you mean.

“There are three blessings for which I am grateful to fate: first, that I was born a human being and not a beast; secondly, that I was born a man and not a woman; thirdly, that I was born Greek and not a barbarian."
—Thales of Miletus

This whole thing of preservation of tradition and culture is a meme. You will die and what comes after has zero impact on yourself. Your being completely shuts down. There's absolutely no guilt. There's nobody up there. This universe is destined to perish sooner or later.
Parents and murderers are two sides of a coin. Parents give you life without your consent, while murderers take it, also without consent.
Procreating, giving birth to new conscious entities in this universe is basically mandating with a death sentence your own creation, without the consent of this entity to come into ''Being''. This is hardly an act out of love. Life is no gift. This is pure selfishness, to assert your dominance and spread your genes. To use this new soldier of the White race in order to further your own primitive interests in this clusterfuck of chemicals put together. You deserve to be spit in the face by your own creation, at the very least.
Whites have killed, massacred and abused the shit out of other races, and can't really complain of what's coming to them. If Jews or eventually East Asians are smart enough to wipe Whites off the face of the Earth, let it be. If Whites manage to survive and dominate again, I couldn't care less either. Survival of the fittest.

Can alt-right and ancap go along? Am I retarded if I like them both?

>What is it that your serious, most earnest self believes in?
>I believe in the Individuum. There is no collective brain. You alone have to make decisions based on logic and not trust others to do it for you. Your self is a set of value, a potential how to make it in the world. You mustn't be selfless and don't have pity, because that means you're doing something for your own disadvantage. You betray your set of values, your ideology and your "self" (=selfless).

individualism leads to dragon-kin and bronies. your personality is given form from your genetic predispositions by cultures and society, the more similar to yourself the people who help you with this are, the smoother and faster you develop.

i used to be a Randian, and I'm still a Nietzschean. Its clear though that this thinking leads people to simply fall apart as individuals, rendering them incapable of executing the reasoning or personal morality required to grow as a person. your genetic links are the infrastructure for your personality, without it you just have a floating castle, an imagined personality.

empathy exists for a reason, it isn't a fluke of evolution. its a gamble that helping someone will payoff later, a sort of deliberately lazy accounting among friends. the key here is that to benefit you by extension, they must be yours, and they must be or have the potential to become peers

>Collectivism has caused socialism, the problems of immigration, the lgbtq-thing, censorship, decline in character and consequently the cultural decadence.

on the contrary, a lot of this is derived from the enlightenment-era sanctity of the individual.
>can't generalize other races, must account for them individually.
>who are you to tell me where to put my dick, its my choice

naturally, after they assert that everything about them is 'their choice', they turn around and start talking about 'we' and 'our' duties to each other. its a kind of shell game, really

> earnest

OP Nietzsche wasn't serious about anything he wrote.

but Dostoevsky life was not like that at all, he was very successful and famous, apart from being persecuted at times

>t. Le fedora nihilist teen
Fuck off, whites made everything that is good and beautiful in this world. To those that have eyes, the other races are so blatantly inferior it hurts to read people saying this shit.

>
>That being a small enough scale for those involved to have meaningful relationships. I think where collectivism falls apart is when you're supposed to give a shit about people you've never met

it breaks completely when you can't exclude the insufficient

thats a convenient ideology for someone who is gifted everything in life by society

I will check it out
I agree, but not wholly. Christianity was also a driving force Europe. The reason Christians advanced so rapidly compared to Muslims, is directly because Christians had ideas about forgiveness and tolerance. This is a better vehicle for the advancement of a civilization.
Jesus said something along the lines of "treat a foreigner as a fellow countryman" which I think we can all agree with. This doesnt mean let 5 million refugees into country. This means to me at least, "be steward to a traveler or foreigner."

>shitposting the intellectual property of cartoon network
youre subhuman (below human retards)

Somebody has been watching too much rick and morty. Also you're probably a kike so there's that.

pardon me?

>Best book ever btw. Seriously.
female detected

I don't di tge ideology thing anymore. I guess you could say I'm an individualist libertarian, but basically I just do what's best for me while trying not o be a dick. I also don't lie unless it's for my safety. I tried figuring out morality but there's no case in it, you always end up contradicting yourself.

its almost as if human nature has never changed and all the "intellectuals" are just observing their surroundings

>individualism
You're like a leftist but you don't realise it.

No, it was *exactly* like that. He was very poor, embittered by liberalism taking over Russian society, unsuccesful, and not taken seriously until after Crime and Punishment (which he wrote one year after Man from the Underground).

The whole book is an outrage inspired by reading "What is ti be done?" by Chernyshevsky. Heck, he even writes about this in "Demons" when he refers to Shatov (who is secretly a writer) drafting a 'brilliant' pamphlet against that novel.

What the fuck Swissbro? Stop this "Individualist" Sargon-like cuckery right now. The reason why nothing makes entirely sense to you is simple. The ulitimate solution is National Socialism. It is not marxist "socialism", but one that values the individual and makes it strive for greatness for it's race, for it's collective.

Can you prove that humans are capable of true selfessness? Do you not recieve any advantage by being nice to friends, family, neighbours? Race still matters as a social thing. My future white children are more likely to be considered as part of my white neighbour's children's in-group. A muslim neighbour and his kids might want to establish a caliphate, very bad for my children. That's why I ought to have preference for people that are racially and socially like me, because they can provide better security for my children.

Caring about oneself too much simply makes no sense. We are going to die. Is your personality or the information you have gathered that special? Nah, maybe not. Taking an eternal attitude to life is liberating, and realizing that there's life beyond oneself. You are not an end, but a bridge between beast and overman. One's most important life is to create the best conditions for his bloodline to succeed.

Why are you flying an obsolete foreign national custom flag that would go to war with half of who you'd consider white by your own definition?

I believe that suffering is the dominant and most undeniable and ultimately the only really important aspect of human existence and that our primary ambition should be to diminish it.

Most positive aspects of existence are generally too fleeting and ultimately unrewarding to put a lot of effort into and leave you returning to baseline within moments, so we should make that baseline as bearable as possible.

My politics are a result of that. I'm against multiculturalism and immigration because it causes unnecessary conflict, for example, while doing nothing about the structural problems that cause mass migration in the first place. Most of my positions are generally 'things are fucked up enough as it is, let's not actively try to make them worse at the very least.'

I just want to get to my deathbed in one piece without hippies making an obstacle course out of it because attachment to naive ideologies.

The Underground man has some valid points but he's a lunatic, and he's missing entire elements of Dostoevsky's philosophy. He's railing against a society that he sees as injust and hypocritical, which it is, but he himself is a delusional and spiteful person, which he admits.

In biology it is wrong to talk about superiority (unless you restrict it to one measurable variable). It's all about adaptation.

the relevant variable here is success in an advanced society. We're all aware that blacks outcompete other races as hunter-gathers on the African plains

If a tree falls in the forest....
Or a leaf.

Thats the most selfish bullshit i've ever read. For a start tradition and culture is about the quality of life. If we act as nihilist degenerates then sure we'll have some mindless fun but the lives of future generations will be impacted. We may not live to see this, but its iportant to the survival of civilisation that we preserve what we have, and create rather than destroy so that each generation is happier and more advanced than the next. You wouldn't live in the comfort you do today, shilling on a computer if it weren't for the sacrifices and selflessness of our (white) ancestors. You are probably a piece of shit if you dont realise the importance of heritage and of beauty, preservation and tradition.

isolationist cyber nazism

Those before us spent thousands of years relentlessly self-improving and innovating, only for nihilists to attempt to fritter it all away in acts of cowardly temptation and greed

Even putting value on adaptation is ultimately subjective. "Nature" cannot make value judgements. When I speak in terms of superiority and inferiority, I'm making references to near-universal values that almost everyone agrees upon. Its like making a judgement that someone is more attractive than someone else. The most "rational" thing to say is that attractiveness is subjective but we know that in reality that's an absurd positon to take.

I believe in science, logic, and true universal justice. Anything that seeks to subvert or distort any of these three virtues need be destroyed. It isn't race but a weak justice system that fails to properly defend the innocent that drags me to hate immigration. It isnt religion but its consistent attempts to subvert science, enslave weak peoples minds and the subsequent attempts to control others who do not agree through various violent and non-violent means. It isn't politics but the politicians who make decisions against the public good and will against logic and reason.

Market Socialism. The best of both worlds.

>Market Socialism
We really didn't need any more evidence that 'anarchists' are retarded but thanks I guess

My whole philosophy is that I'm God and I can do anything through magical power. Also I charge sigils by imagining them with my third eye during climax.

I guess it depends on the context; I was at the bottom of the barrel already so it was the opposite for me. Very life affirming, My life is has noticeably and tangibly improved since reading him, that is more than I can say for any other person in history,

Make an argument you fuck.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_socialism#In_practice
Note the size of that section compared to the 'theoretical history' section

It's not that famous of an ideology and the established history is much more than what's on the wikipedia page. Even though it doesn't have a massive history that doesn't mean you can discredit it's obvious successes.

It doesn't have any successes, there are no market socialist countries, or barely, and there are certainly no civilizations based on it.

What is with you guys and these autistic obscure theoretical systems

Socialism with a market. It's not popular but it's not that obscure. It's not only the few Market Socialist countries that are examples of it's successes. The cooperative model used in capitalism is very successful.

The word 'socialism' is basically a meme anyway. It means like 50 different things depending on what is convenient for the sake of the argument.

My question is why, why this random, not particularly successful economic system. What attracts you about this

It's take the pros of both capitalism and socialism and get rids of the majority of the negatives. It's much more successful than any other form of socialism and easier to convince people.

There is a form of market socialism that's called "Economic Democracy" which is just so people don't get scared. When I bring up Economic Democracy principles to the general population they seem to like what it says. It's only when you bring the word socialism in that peoples brains turn off.

Market Socialism did work in Yugoslavia

Rojava right now is a currently existing form of Market Socialism too.

Yugoslavia is the better argument

Rojava doesn't really prove anything, considering it only exists because of the USAF.

wait so you only support it as a way to sneak in whatever 'anarchist' insanity you actually want

But at least mr an com can recognize that there is a fundamental flaw in our current society

we need revolutionary change, although i'm not a leftist at all

There is more than this plane of existence. Earth is one of a few middle reality. From Sumerians to Vedics to Norse to Hebrews... Our place in the supra-verse is known.

We fight, we struggle, we die... Yet there is a beauty and a peace in the madness. This place is not heaven/devaloka/asgard, but it's not complete separation from the Leuka (light).

There are lessons of this reality that must not be avoided. Among other things, moderation, mortality, love, compassion, aggression, the physical meted by the spiritual...

Some might identify this as stoicism, but stoicism assumes a certain subjectivity.
It is entirely possible for you to travel outside of this plane of existence. But you can't and shouldn't leave if you haven't grasped some of the basic lessons in this universe.
One lesson is that heaven is the spiritual, hell is the material. The more obsessed one is with having, rather than being, the more materialistic one is. Materialism, to its eventual conclusion, IS a level of hell. Soulless, hellish terrors. To gain things without the fostering of the soul is a terrifying concept to those that know what it means.
It's why Jesus said it's difficult for a rich man to enter heaven. A rich person is a materialist. Heaven belongs to the soul, not the body. If one identifies with their own mortal death (rather than learning from it), they've doomed themselves. The society of the Urheimat knew this.

Yet there is forgiveness and redemption. The spirit is eternal. Don't abandon it. Nurture it.