Things that bear saying

A question that seems to cramp the narrative of people stating "yes, some races commit more crime, but they are often underprivileged", or various other environmental factors. The question is this: what about self control? I don't like various governmental employees for various reasons. However, i don't randomly key their cars or punch them in the face, as this is both a bad idea in general, and socially unacceptable. Why, then, is this behavior excused for nonwhites? Does a shitty, restricted environment lead to a lack of self control? If this is the case, why isn't the Appalachias, one of the poorest places in the country, a smoking crater?

If they are capable of self control, but refuse to do so, they are criminals, without excuse. There can be various reasons and influences, but it comes down to one single soul in the end, who leaves the money on the ground or takes it, who pulls a gun or keeps walking. If you choose to, willingly, break the law, or go against society as a whole, then you have chosen to do so, and should bear responsibility for what comes after. If you are incapable of self control, then you need to be overseen by a caregiver or institution, for both others safety and your own.

This is where the rubber meets the road. Either you can or cannot use self control. If you can, then if you choose not to, you don't get to cry about how you didn't have a choice later. If you cannot, then you should not be operating in society without aid and care as if you were a functional member of society. Whites are expected to follow this basic premise without any excuse or deviation, why nobody else?

found you

Something to keep in mind when people talk about the explosive wave of white mass shooters. Firstly, overall gun deaths is statically tiny when you look at the nation as a whole, which doesn't excuse it, but does run counter to the chicken-little-tier fear-mongering going on. More to the point, did you know our crime statistics are segregated in the US? “Gang violence” is a blanket term that can cover everything from a fistfight on a playground to mass murder. The definition is hazy, and what constitutes a “gang member” is even more nebulous, as you don't actually have to be in a gang to be lumped in with gang violence. If you have associated with others, even just going to the same school or workplace, that the police believe to be gang members, you and any crime you commit can be ascribed to gang violence.

Quick guess which racial demographics make up almost the entirety of this gang violence. Whites are single digit and have been for more then fifty years.

Why does any of this matter? Well, it's like this. If Tyreese goes over to DeQuan's cookout and shoots every motherfucker he sees, if one person involved anywhere in the event was/was near someone suspected of being in a gang, it's gang violence. Not a mass shooting, even if twenty or thirty people die,it's “gang violence”. Shoot up a mall, school, kill double digits of people, no problem, it's gang violence. The thing is, this is almost EXCLUSIVELY applied to blacks, and some mexicans, and to nobody else. Whites are connected to “groups”, or cults, or whatever, but not gangs.

Ok, so that's interesting, and racist as hell, so what is the point, ultimately?

The issue is how gang violence is handled. It is basically a legal black hole. Once the gang violence label comes on, it becomes almost impossible to find out so much as a name, let alone any actual case information. It's intended to protect surviving victims from reprisals, but it effectively allows the law to sweep what would otherwise be a massive, glaring issue under the rug, and forget about it. It even works with serial killers, so long as it's mostly black on black. If ZaDravius hunts, kills, and skins dozens of women over a space of ten or twenty years, so long as it's mostly black on black and in a shitty area, it's gang violence. Nearly forgot, simply living or committing a crime in an area suspected of gang activity can mean your crimes are gang violence.

If the news and media reported every shooting that took place in a public place and killed more then three people, and included all the events dismissed as “gang violence”, they'd have to start a news channel just to report on this, 24/7. The percentage of white mass shooters would shrink to near obscurity under the wave of black mass shooters. It's not that only whites shoot places up, it's that they're not excused and dismissed.

Holy shit nazibro, do you have an alert on or something?

Startled me so bad i didn't even attach anything...

nah we just get lucky. plus i just got unbanned like 20mins ago for posting khazar milkers lol

Part of the reason why there's such a massive anti-american sentiment on college campuses is because a large portion of the people teaching there protested against the government, and either dodged the draft by going to college, or were taught by those who did. If you watch old newsreels about the hippy movement and such, realize that a good chunk of those folks ended up going in to academia, and ended
up passing on their “like, fuck the man, man” worldview. That's not the sole reason, and it's very hard to dismiss evidence of a focused effort to “convert” youth, but it's a demographic that is often overlooked, the hippy in a tweed suit.

Now, college has always been a place of prestige, warranted or not. Steel stamping line regular joe's worked and lost fingers to give their kids the chance to avoid life in a factory, to seize something better. Some carry on a legacy of higher education, some breach in for the first time. It's intended to be a place of higher learning, somewhere that you build on studies and ideas nurtured in lower schools, and even extrapolated to something that can bring the daily bread. However, as time has marched on, it appears people have stopped hearing “higher education”, and just hear “higher”. There is a rising arrogance among both students and teachers in various campuses. Yes, people who have gone to college often know more on various topics, but this does not mean they are able to speak with authority on every topic, nor does it automatically confer a superior position to those that have not attended collage.

It's too easy to be consumed by peers and environment. Cries of “echo chamber” on both sides arn't all that far off, but it can be more insidious then just hurling memes at people. If you are immersed in a culture of superiority, one that values knowledge above all, and assumes that those within this culture are by default more knowledgeable then those outside, then you're going to start to fall in to that pattern. The issue has become that, unlike the old days, this “superior scholar” mindset never actually goes away. If you got a rubbish degree sixty or seventy years ago, then you could use it to swab your tears at night as you hunted for a real job, more often then not. You needed some kind of marketable skill to use, and would more often then not leave your old college town and have that bubble of superiority popped rather fast.

However, now it can keep going for years, decades, lifetimes, fueled by indulgent media services and the relentless drumbeat of social media. If you keep a tight, loud circle of associates each feeding in to and sustaining this bubble of superiority, you can also force reality to adapt. People generally want to get along, for better or worse, and when someone bitches and moans how his gender studies degree is as valid as a medical doctorate, people will often buckle and give in, if only to shut them up. That permissive attitude is a whole other rant, but the point is that this also feeds into the bubble. Look, they won, so they must be right! These poor brainlets need them to show how wrong they are, to display with their higher education why the democratic system must be torn down. So what if they whine, they're dumb, they don't know better.

Ivory tower intellectualism is doing more harm to the west then almost anything else. It is a prime infection, the social HIV that is causing our AIDS of the civilization. There isn't a quick fix for this, but being aware of a problem can sometimes help in and of itself. Scholarship is not by itself a problem, and is in fact needed to keep humanity on coarse, the issue is arrogant pricks using knowledge as an alternative to force of arms to compel perceived serfs in to submission and compliance.

ill make it a point to read these thoroughly tonight. Most of the time I just save the art

it was meant to be, i suppose...and the "big titted jewess" thing has apparently being going on forever. There's apparently references going back well before the crusades.

been building a text document of all this crap, lord help me.

how goes it for you this evening? This whole shooting fallout has been a little nuts.

Weakness has become a virtue. It's why there's such a derisive rage for soyboys/numales/bugmen. They are weak, soft, and fawning, but more then that they expect everyone else to be the same. Many of those on or shifting to the right have been expected to be strong, to endure and often suffer, and do so in silence, or at least quietness. The idea that others can go along with their worst suffering being late rent payments is so galling it's hard not to deride and look down at them. Men are defined by struggle and strength, of will or of body, and casting that aside has led to such a rapid and horrifying decline. Not everyone can, or should, become Caser, but a man should be able to command at least a degree of respect.

came just for the pixel images, wow.

A galling trend I've seen gain more and more traction is this argument that, because of A, B is okay, or at least you shouldn't be upset. Because whites overtook america, we should now sit quiet while we are overtaken. Because these people come from a different culture, we should excuse their behavior, even celebrate it. Yes, these people here have broken, stolen, and so forth, but they come from a place of poor privilege, so it's ok.

The past doesn't invalidate or excuse the present. Just because something worse happened doesn't give current events a free pass. Just because others have experienced more pain does not invalidate mine.

Roll up, roll up, come for pixel art, stay to bitch about the world and talk with a rusty nobody. Cozy in a bleak way, or at least that's the hope.

Calling yourself "alt-right" is a terrible idea. It was a title handed down by cold-war-era strategy planners who were trying to encapsulate a movement that included both hardline national socialists with schoolkids who were able to bend reality via ice age death cults and pure autism. Not just Sup Forums, but the internet gestalt culture has survived and thrived on the fact that it is a faceless, shapeless being more then anything. Holding to an identity allows you to join together and define goals, sure, but it also allows others to get a handle on and, to some extent, control you.

We're weirder then the world can process. Some are normal in real life, but many can't connect or function like other people. Why pretend to be normal, to fit the normal flow of things, right when being too weird to properly address is becoming an actual resource?

...

was reading these, and yeah I just had to share the ones I had. The shapiro sister specifically, but anyway yeah that shooter thing was too good to pass up. I honestly cant tell who's jewing who anymore. I'm feeling good tonight, how about yourself?

Ill be reading these

>someone bitches and moans how his gender studies degree is as valid as a medical doctorate
ppl do this? holy shit

I don't think the shooting itself was staged, but i think the majority of the narrative afterward is being heavily influenced, if not fully manufactured. Personally, guns are guns, they are a tool like any other, and the issue comes down to the people wielding them. You can't just ban things you don't like so you can avoid talking about people. Every single time this shit happens, the shooter turns out to be some broken, abused bastard who could have easily been helped, healed or diverted at any time. If you endlessly treat someone like shit, especially if they are already broken, and withhold any kind of support or compassion, you don't get to act shocked when they crack under the pressure.

But it's easier to talk about how evil tools are then try to look at the wave of neglect and clannish exclusion that is causing all this shit in the first place. Fucking sucks.

They went to college. They are smarter, better, and more right then those that did not, therefore they stand alongside all the other educated elite. It doesn't matter what all was studied, the action itself is what matters. It flares up the worst with more "modern" degrees, once they finally leave academia and discover their options are finding an out-of-field job or trying to become a social media personality/commentator. The only other option is to force the framework of society to shift enough to make the degree valid, and then you get marches, protests, and movements.

Not everyone is like this, and a good portion of folks are no more snobby then when they went in, even at times less so, but the proportion of those leading the wave of leftist rhetoric holding "junk" degrees or overstating their elite knowledge is tellingly high.

>Men are defined by struggle and strength, of will or of body,
I have wondered about this off and on for several months, and it is refreshing to see that someone recognizes this. Not every may have a commanding physique, but there are those that have a strong will and a sharpened mind.

Certainly there is a trend to "just give up thinking, let 'us' think for you" and this is clearly outlined in modern living, especially in technology, where the slow trend of "move everything into someone else's server and pay rent for it" has become a defacto norm. Ten years ago it was "if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear being spied upon", no matter how many times it was pointed out just how shitty an argument this was (my response was "fine, post your Social Security number if you have nothing to hide and privacy means nothing to you").

This underlying trend keeps pushing further and further. It is one thing to question authority on the grounds that close scrutiny will expose corruption; it's another to unthinkingly and blindly obey it, even when it crosses moral boundaries.

Thank you both OP and the person replying for this thread. It's this kind of 1% signal in the noise that keeps me lurking in Sup Forums. I promise not to shit up the thread beyond my .02 cents already given. Keep going...

Checked
Completely agree. He got there from being abandoned or feeling it at least and that's the same measure you go about handling it? Everyone is quick to shift responsibility or use things like this for their own purpose. The funnies are coming from the CNN kids and their absolute shit attempt doing whatever the hell it is they think they're doing. When the memes are great, life's great

I mean claiming gender studies counts as MD specifically.

Please feel free, think of it like a coffee bar still turning out lattes even though the back wall has fallen in. It won't last, and it's not normal, but the company is nice all the same.

People have gotten numb, men especially. Men in media are either tough reactionary men of action, or buffoons and bumblers. Yes, there's some outliers of this, but look back to how men were depicted in, say, the 50's or so. That's not to say then was intrinsically better, but it sharply details the shift of men's place in the world. fathers are clowns, or absent, boys have the choice of aggression, vocal submission, or obscurity. Even worse, somehow nobody seems to notice, or care.

Depend on others. Allow others to choose, keep your voice down, be nice. If something happens you don't like, tolerate it, other bad things happened too, you think you have it worse off? The funny thing is it's all like a house of cards, a few moments of defiance can leave massive holes in the overall framework of the weak-pandering narrative. Maybe it's just me, but I hate relying on others for things i can do myself, and hate being at the mercy of those who presume authority with no basis. Maybe i'm just a hard head.

Music, movies, games, books, it's never anybody to blame, it's something outside. It's not that people eventually crack. Look at Don Quixote, a classic send-up of the seditious nature of "evil" media.

I think someone at a feminist rally made the gender studies/MD argument, but now i can't find it...

Very interesting point about the way gang statistics are categorized separately. I''d never heard that before.

I thought so too

>gender studies
What amazes me is that "gender studies" can be objectively held up and defined as "A degree in philosophy that narrowly constrains itself to a single viewpoint, typically defined as 'feminism', while rejecting all other thought-forms".

We are literally handing out incomplete philosophy degrees to women who haven't heard all of the other ideas presented in philosophy, and there are DOZENS. In other words, it's completely inferior subset of skills and thought that is part of an existing degree - and one that can actually be used to get a job (although I didn't say it would be easy to get one as a philosophy major).

...

I came for the typos. This one really really makes you look stupid, user. Especially if you're going around telling people what it all boils down to.

There's infographics and studies floating around, I need to collect some I think. However, it's true, gang violence is a blanket term you can hide all kinds of crime statistics behind. It's also a mild kind of justification, it's not the criminal's fault, it's the gang, it's the pressure from the leaders making them do it, so it doesn't count. We all get to make choices, even if we don't have many options. However, we have to excuse things that don't fit the current narrative, it seems, and it skews the whole view of what's actually going on.

It's fine to specialize, especially with philosophy, as too broad a view can just drown out any kind of point or actual progress, but you can't narrow so far down that you don't see anything outside that specialization. What's worse, we've then taken these tunnel-vision views and elevated them to the same level of fully rounded disciplines. it allows the adherents to claim the same legitimacy, without having to face the tough and at times shattering questions. Even worse, it'd held up as a mastery of this understanding, an authority that brooks question only from those of similar position, and effectively locks out outside probing. All this descended from the tradition of philosophy, a pursuit who's greatest figures have always been those who asked the most questions, and were quick to state their own lack of understanding and knowledge. And nobody questions this, it's just accepted.

Probably part of why so many end up just quietly shaking their heads, or shouting to the void, like me.

My proofreading sucks, i'll admit that freely, and i'm sorry for it. Also sorry if I sound as if i'm the authority on things, it's mostly just things I see, or feel, that seem to be overlooked or just wrong. A way to reach out and see if anyone else feels the same, or if I actually am just another nutter. hopefully pixel art helps soften the affront.

>fathers are clowns
I actually remember this from the 90's, just before I stopped watching television.

First it was advertising. Men were shown to be, how shall I put it, "ditzy", "unreliable", "incompetent", and sometimes just plain stupid. There was ALWAYS a woman that would appear and "kiss the boo boo to make it all better", or worse, show up the father-figure (these were always 30+ year old men) as a complete bumbling idiot. It didn't take long for that cancer to metastasize into actual TV shows. Then it spread quickly into everything - movies, hell even radio had "idiot men on parade" during commercials.

I thought it was fishy. 20 years later, I realize how subtle changes can be made and presented over years to slowly bend and pervert people's thoughts.

Think of a generation of boys growing up in broken households, with a single mother parent, and (if they were damn lucky) only weekend visits to dear old Dad, who was "the enemy" in many cases. Emulation of Dad usually meant a swift response and even retribution - "how dare you do what he did, he was horrible to me", etc. etc. Think of the potential impact this has had on an entire generation growing up. The impression that you are worthless, or inept, or stupid, or shouldn't even try, and just defer to the Goddess named Mommy because she will make it all better.

Fast forward 20 years and we have an entire generation of men that have been feminized, what little traits of masculinity they had smothered by the enormous teet of Mom's never-ending verbal onslaughts.

Is it any wonder that the US is in dire straights today? That we are really in trouble? Think of how this generation was taught to abdicate their thoughts to someone else, to give up the mantle of being your own man (and by extension connecting to their internal essence of manhood).

>I came for the typos
I'm just as guilty, although it takes the form of being tired after a very long day of work, coupled with shoddy editing on my part. But I am willing to overlook a few grammatical errors, or misspellings, if it means that actual semantic content was conveyed, examined, and perhaps even refined.

>The funny thing is it's all like a house of cards, a few moments of defiance can leave massive holes in the overall framework of the weak-pandering narrative.
I've heard this called a "preference cascade." The moment where everyone is too afraid to say that the emperor has no clothes, but then one person points it out and the dam breaks.
I think we're close to one, but not quite there yet. The media un-personings are getting weaker. Look at how easy James Damore got it compared to Pax Dickinson.

But there's still a steep cost to speaking up. Something else needs to change...

Even moreso, look at the current trend with "good" males in media. A lot of soft, weak, overly emotional men who help show how good it is to be just that. Watch any horror or disaster movie, the guy who thought to bring a gun, or who moves to take charge despite people's feelings is regarded with shock and disgust. It's the poor nu-male type who manages to overcome adversity, often lucking in to it more then anything. It was some horror movie I was watching a bit ago that really brought it home, one of the party pulled out a gun to address the horror attempting to kill them all, and the group reacted with more revulsion and fear to him then the evil thing.

I keep waiting for someone to try, to produce something as sort of a throwback to the old gender roles, the old structure of family and community. it's silly, i'm sure, and unlikely to happen, but there seems to be a huge portion of the west that would like to see something pandered to the right, rather then the left. It's probably a lot of sour grapes, but i'd like to see something produced that mentions values and strength without an ironic, mocking lean.

thanks.

propaganda =/= knowledge

>The media un-personings are getting weaker
This is an actual trend because people are slowly realizing that the original "but our free press is the pillar of free speech and a watchdog" has been morphed into "mouthpiece that says whatever its masters want it to say, so that agendas can be promoted".

The free press was never really fully free, but it was at least approachable, and there were always opposing viewpoints. Now there are no opposing viewpoints - because it is desirable that there be no opposition. Or worse, the opposition (when rarely presented) is itself a straw-man, fabricated with weak pretenses that are easily punched through by a one-sided argument.

I pretty much gave up on the press because of this. Frankly, the tipping point for me is when news.google.com was first released, and then I noticed an alarming trend - news stories from all kinds of outlets all over the globe were merely echo chambers of a single, "seed" story. In many cases, minor alterations were made, a snip of a sentence there, or a paragraph shortened here, but in the end, each one was easily recognizable. It took Google about 3-6 months to realize the snafu of presenting raw news this way, and suddenly "all stories were unique and different". I suspect all that really happened is they adjusted things slightly so you didn't see the "man behind the curtain" being amplified over and over again.

That is when I stopped reading and listening to news. Because it was always questionable, and after examination, rarely of value. Only local news rags that weren't snapped up by conglomerates were of value, and even then they all had their own "slant", left or right, that still introduced enormous bias.

I think social media is both the cause and the eventual cure of it, honestly. The ability to control and manufacture consensus, the fact that people worry about what strangers on the other side of the planet might think about their comments is poison. However, it only serves the left narrative for as long as they are the most vocal, and it seems to be shifting, as you said. The cost is high, but with every nazi lynching and firing, the silent majority gets backed more and more into a corner. I know how devastating change can be, especially drastic change, but it's hard not to wish for that final domino to fall.

I don't know if it'll be within my lifetime, but i dearly hope so. I hope I get to live in a world where having and expressing pride in one's nation and community isn't also a possible firing offense.

Is it really that hard to report on events? To tell people about something that happened? it seems like it shouldn't be, honestly, see an event, report back what happened. I don't think it's necessarily the reporting itself, it's the confusion of "news" with "commentary". People care less about what the event is, and more about what people are saying about it. It seems even moreso that the "news" is actually just "editorial" now, without the actual story ever being reported directly.

I think there is a powerful need for a division between reporters and commentators. Two stations, Cable News Network, and Cable Commentary Network, but i don't know if it really matters. In school, when you learn about reporting and such, there's this huge stress on neutrality and honesty, and that those who ignore these are a tiny and dismissed subsection of tabloid sensationalists, but more and more it seems that they are the vast, vast majority.

>why nobody else?
I agree with your whole post except for this. Asians and Indians are expected to follow societal rules the same as whites. This extends to a certain extent, Muslims as well since we've managed to keep most the bad apples (arguably they are all) out. In the United States the only racial groups not expected to have self-control are blacks and hispanics.

I believe this is because society as a whole subconsciously understands their native behaviors quite well. As Diogenes said (after being called a dog and pissing on a man) "Why are you surprised that a dog would do such a thing?" The excuses made are because any form of biological determinism (both good and bad outcomes) is seen as an entire negative and goes against the current paradigm of exceptions to the rule make the new rule.

The problem is getting that to matter, a lot of times. If the loudest voice is saying propaganda is the truth, and has the power to punish and control any who speak against it, it becomes the default truth, even if it's not. However, it's looking like that really only works in the short term, as it looks like nearly every day there's more and more cracks in the propaganda parading as knowledge.

Go back to the synagogue rabbi shlmo.

...actually, you're right. However, indians and asians are significantly less violent, or at least are vastly overshadowed. I also agree on the pull-away from the role of biology in behavior, we're all disposed from ages of development and evolution to behave different, and while we can overcome or fall to these base natures, we still all have different "toolkits" to start out with. The cry of "we are all the same" has warped to "nobody is allowed to be different", and is causing blindness to glaring realities. When you start ignoring reality, however bad, in favor of a more comfortable lie, shit starts to go down hill rapidly.

Yes, I think a lot of people are starting to realize this. Even people who are politically uninvolved.

There's also a growing group of internet "personalities" who are unwelcome in mainstream society but popular online. These people are mostly alt-lite trash, the Sargons and Cernovichs and such, but they form a sort of ad hoc support network for anyone who becomes the target of a witchhunt. If someone gets hounded out of a job, that person can go on the e-celeb talking circuit and get their message out to the public.

I think the next step is a legal action fund. The media libel machine is vulnerable to lawsuits. We saw that with Thiel/Hulk's attack on Gawker. And we're seeing that with Damore's wrongful termination suit against Google. That's a pretty powerful tool.

Yes the eye for an eye mentality is so bad these days. Everything is justified in the most abstract of manners at times too.

dont forget the cartoons. You can't have a kids/adults cartoon these days that doesn't belittle the father figure.

It's a kind of secular original sin. It's not even that you are just wrong, it's that you have been and will be wrong, and your actions just further your evil. Witch hunt is more accurate a term then most people really understand, I think. Everyone has to be good and right all the time, and life just doesn't work like that. It's hard to own up to fuckups or lapses in behavior, but that's how things work. By the same token, nobody is infallible, but that doesn't mean that single mistakes or issues can invalidate someone entirely. Nobody can just let anything go anymore, everything needs a clean, concise resolution, no compromise or gray areas.

Good lord yes. I'm pressed to think of anything in the last five or ten years in animation that actually had a strong father figure, at least out of the US. The worst thing is that's sort of what makes the gag worth it. It's funnier to see a normally strong, capable and poised figure utterly baffled by, say, navigating a PTA meeting, or suddenly dissolving in to momentary terror because of a spider. If it's constant, it's just numb, puffy slapstick, at best.

just as there is a strong genetic component to iq, I think there is a strong genetic component to other behavioral traits like time preference, impulsivity, altruism, etc.

non-whites simply don't have the genes to maintain a European civilization.

What if I told you your self control comes from punishment and that humans are not like you^
You're the result of fear and repression.
Civilization cucks the fuck out of you and it shows.
We need something between the two and keep in mind you're a faggot and not a model.

Absolutism always beat relativism. And the Apollonian does just that without the Dionysian.
Filthy christcuck pleb

...what are humans like, then? Not trying to be a prick, I'd honestly like an example.

Given the way the zeal the modern left fights with now I almost wouldn't even call it secular. Hell you look at the changes of people before and after they subscribe to this way of thought and they look like downright different people.

>I know how devastating change can be, especially drastic change, but it's hard not to wish for that final domino to fall.
It really all boils down to the people who silently sympathize with us. There are men who disagree with the way things are going. But they keep their heads down so they don't get in trouble. Can they be convinced to speak up?

I think it depends on two things.

First is how painful it is to speak up. We've already discussed this a bit ITT. A media campaign against you used to be a death sentence. Your life was over. You'd never be able to mount a defense against a media onslaught. But that's changing. It's still bad but not the end of the world. As you mentioned, social media is helping this.

Second is how painful it is to stay silent. It eats away at you to pretend to agree with something that you hate. To betray yourself with silence. If the Left's loyalty games get more outrageous then eventually our silent allies will be asked to cross a bridge too far. All signs point to this happening...but who knows? The human capacity for debasement is endless.

Once it becomes less painful to speak up than stay silent...that's when the final domino will fall.

What are humans like.
Monkeys go on to genocidal sprees at time.
Sex and violence are linked. Women love to get their hair pulled, their butt slapped for reasons. They like a worthy warrior. Something along these lines. Everything to grow.
Now the problem is that such a free man is no match in front of army of faggots so they win but they eventually kill themselves. That's us.

an army*

Don't dare make that comparison though, or you'll get raked over the coals or simply dismissed for your ignorance. They are above and beyond the trappings of religious dogma, the very implication is the most vile of heresy. It's the fact that there's various shades of liberal coming to the right not because they agree, but because it's the only way to distance themselves from some of their increasingly rabid fellows. What I find so odd is that nobody seems to really notice what I think is the very glaring paradox.

It seems like you have a, if not low, at least minimal opinion of humans. Is that it then, we are made of violence and genocide, broken up by brief lulls as we rest up for the next round? Is everything else just window dressing for these basic, primal urges? Nothing more then chemicals wrapped in meat?

It sounds as if other people have rejected him. So now he's looking for a way to reject them.
If everything is meaningless, then his own failure to meaningfully connect is less bad.

Very sad. I hope he finds meaning soon. A man needs something to believe in besides chemicals and meat.

It's that final attack from your deepest heart, when you finally have to speak, whatever the cost, or be destroyed. The corner where you can stay silent and not care is getting smaller and smaller, by the day it seems at times. My worry is that the final pressure will be so great that it will be less of speech and more of screaming. I love a good smash-up, and strife is part of the human condition, but I do worry. Maybe it comes from having kids, or just being overly used to peace, but widespread civil unrest is often a more pleasant idea then reality.

Hopefully it doesn't come to torches and pitchforks in the streets, and if it does, hopefully it's brief. I hope that the left's apparent stranglehold is easily broken. Most of all, I just hope a world comes from it where people are forced to walk on eggshells less.

I never even mentioned chemicals.
I only spoke in terms of animality.
Look how it tempers with our instincts. Think of vengeance, vengeance is what you feel, justice is how you temper it in the hands of a court.
My first example was to show you how a human is as an animal. To put it in contrast with the tamed man.
Though a tamed man will lose his drive, the only other option becomes the death cults as you're surrounded by civilization so much so that your animal can't breath.

>they are often underprivileged
you make your own privilege in life fool.

I didn't say you did mention chemicals.

I guess my question is this, at what point does the "human" arise? Are we human because we are animal, or is it because we do things outside the animal urge? I think it's the combination, the balance point between beast and civilized. falling too far to one side or the other leads to either neutered tameness or chaotic savagery, it's that center point that I think really qualifies the concept of "human".

Maybe I've missed the point. I don't think civilization is a shackle, nor nature a single truth. it's both that makes us human.

I'm with you on that one. Civil unrest is anything but civil. People who hope for violence are idiots. Nobody familiar with that sort of thing would wish for it.

>The cry of "we are all the same" has warped to "nobody is allowed to be different", and is causing blindness to glaring realities
This right here is the foundational pillar of leftist politics. Once you concede to the premise that everyone is equally capable (both mentally and physically), the entire left wing belief structure suddenly makes perfect sense.
If there are no inherit racial or gender-based differences, then the only explanation for discrepancies in crime rates, wealth and other statistics becomes the society itself, i.e. discrimination. This is why discrimination (in any form) has become the great evil in their minds - as it clearly explains almost every issue in the world. The conclusion is sound, but the initial premise is wrong.
What's worse is that it's almost impossible to get out of this mentality. To consider that genetics has an influence on mental and physical capabilities, behavior and preferences automatically draws with it the alternate (right wing) conclusions as to what the cause of those discrepancies is. You'd need to do the one thing you've been conditioned to hate over anything else - discriminate.

It's been a pleasure gentlemen, but I'll have to leave you for now. Talk, argue, discuss, let the thread burn down, I hope that, if not enlightening, I may have said one or two things that at least make a degree of sense. there's light out there, it's just dark at the moment.

Failing all that, hopefully the pixel art is neat. See ya next time i guess.

Your musings do not go unappreciated. The art helps though.

>To consider that genetics has an influence on mental and physical capabilities
I also want to add a few thoughts on this as well.
Until a few years ago the stereotype of a right wing person in the US has been that of a middle aged white man who'd show up on TV and say something stupid about global warming or evolution. The right shot itself in the foot, creating the image of the left being rational, knowledgeable and scientific, while the right consisted of uneducated racist hillbillies.
The modern liberals are now piggybacking on this image, despite the fact that they're now dealing with an entirely different enemy (Darwinists, if their own cries of "nazi" are to be believed), and the fact that science is no longer in support of their dogma. How could a rational person, in support of evolution, maintain that genetics has no influence on intelligence, creativity, discipline, capacity for abstract thought or other factors which in modern society are strongly related to financial success?
The left clings on to the old stereotypes that work in their favor, while also holding beliefs out of line with their own self portrayal. This should be pointed out more often, as it simultaneously attacks both the image and the "we are all equal" narrative.

Thanks for posting. I'd love to see an archive of these threads somewhere.

damn, just got back too. Night bro

thanks for the pics and the thoughts