hi pol, i'm a proper far lefty and i want to engage you in peaceful dialogue
i understand that traditional values make a lot of people really happy, having a sense of meaning in your life is really important, and a family and church and community provide that, but they also exclude anyone who doesn't fit into that ideal traditional mould of a person, i don't think thats fair.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
archive.is
twitter.com
How about this. We send all the people who had tradition to Africa and they can live there. Everyone else who loves tradition stays in their own countries.
The problem with your ideology is that it doesn't work if you are trying to build a prosperous nation for your children. While you may not be harming anyone, your pursuit of pleasure in the form of drugs and promiscuous sexual activity are ultimately not contributing anything to a society. It would not be challenging for a determined military force to disrupt your peace and that is why conservatism is necessary.
yeah monocultures are more stable countries but its not really feasible to enforce global monocultures, even genocide if you wanna go that far never actually works, also its very morally wrong
Nature is not fair. What is your end game? Do you want the lines of territories to blur and all nations eventually come together as a one world government with no other nations to keep ourselves in check like a committee that disagrees. This global peace dream you have can , and will over time, harder and ripen into a moth Korea for example with no other nations to disagree.
This progress you guys are obsessed with is going to fuck us. Were making it just fine let's not keep pushing it
Some questions then as a former leftie.
Can you not clearly see that westerners have had their birthright given away to those who will hate them when the gibbs slow down?
How do you expect multi-racial societies to thrive when conflicts aren't mediated by a religion founded on compassion (christianity) but rather a state founded on violence?
The islamification of the west will continue to have largely negative effects on the most vulnerable of society (young girls sold into sex slavery) are you not aware that leftist policies have been complicit in making this a reality?
>Those who don't fit traditional moulds
Do you realize that not elevating degeneracy is not the same as actively punishing it? You can and should absolutely promote traditional life as the highest ideal while understanding that (especially in our current sick society) many people will fall short because they're only human.
If you don't like our way of life, fuck off and mind your own business, too bad most leftists don't know the concept of respect
This is a problem.
Without the welfare state degenerates could be left alone. Now that we're financially responsible for the worst of us measures have to be taken.
personally i think the things left wing governments have achieved are the things i'm proudest of in my country, and having lived in america, that kind of traditionalism and radical individualism that permeates american culture creates a very hostile environment, i couldn't call that a good society for my children
Its blind optimism and it's really selfish.
Why is enthonationalism wrong sage
What might these things be that you're proud of?
If we can't have it both ways on a question, we should go with what works for most people, or have different rules and expectations for different classes of people.
We don't want a global monoculture (although ironically that's been the trend with Americanization). We want many national cultures. Subcultures are genuinely enriching if they don't seek to offend the dominant culture.
I've lived all over the world and what you are saying is absolutely insane user. Its like you are brainwashed by ignorant rhetoric. Sage
nobody wants to stop anyone living their traditional way of life, but its becoming less popular on its own merits, not because anybody is trying to kill it, to me it seems like you guys who don't accept other ways of living
>go back to yourrrrr country
I'd rather my children (even if they weren't white) live in America where they can be exposed to "a hostile environment" instead of in europe and Canada where our governments are actively working on eliminating us without opposition. And actively cover-up crimes against us.
America is the last bastion of liberty in the world, and it hungers for the blood of tyrants.
i think you misunderstood me, i didn't mean one global monoculture, i mean't every individual culture being a monoculture, it's never happened before in history and to make it work you'd need some serious totalitarianism
I don't accept it because it is degenerate
i found living in america to be a horrible experience desu, apart from the national parks which are gorgeous
your cities seem like they're designed around businesses instead of people, the only local communities that exist are the suburbs and the tiny nowhere towns, those towns are dying and the suburbs are like a horrible parody of a real community to me
Hold up. The radical individualism of the US is the DIRECT result of the US rejecting traditional European ideas of royalty and caste like systems of fealty and nation states.
The idea that EVERYONE is equal under the law, with no exceptions for kings and rulers, being a simple example. That's why rights are enumerated at the individual level.
Going to collectivism is potentially a step backwards, as a collective that wields power should be expected to become oppressive at some point without proper checks and balances, ala the tyranny of the majority.
Have you considered whether your dislike of individualism is bigotry?
I am a Bisexual Jew and these 'nazis' are cool.
GET OFF MY BOLIVIAN ICE SKATING FORUM REEEEEEEE
>they also exclude anyone who doesn't fit into that ideal traditional mould of a person
Why don't these people build a better society and show that they can beat the success of nuclear family, chaste society, ideologically close-knit communities, and individualistic meritocracy?
Because so far, people who try to interfere with these things end up with lower standards, more force to maintain their ideals, ignorance of biology and nature, and uncohesive internal structure.
Traditional culture IS being targeted by Social Engineers, because these people are not avid consumers who will buy, be entertained, and vote for bigger and bigger government.
Traditional ideologies support close families, natural biological roles, and resistance to people who intend to impose state power for votes or money. "Progressive" ideology supports tyrannical pressure to enforce equality where it does not naturally occur.
Regarding what you said on the traditional values and how they exclude people...that's not how it works
Society doesn't adapt to you because of your special needs, YOU adapt to society
> but its becoming less popular on its own merits
Let's see we have
>MSM constantly denigrating anything traditional (if it's white)
>Public education with the same message
>Communities that are already falling apart.
People no longer see much of the benefits of traditionalism because they're already becoming a thing of the past. The boomers failed to pass the torch forward and it's largely why things are as bad as they are.
>Bolivian ice skating forum
I'm stealing that
i understand the mistrust of collectivism, of course giving a collective rights over a person leads to a reduction in personal liberty, but on the other hand a collective provides a sense of meaning and being part of something greater than yourself, if you're only out for number one then your accomplishments don't really mean a lot
i lived in a student coop for a year and i found the sense of community and meaning in my work to keep the coop running (i was a chef) incredible, it seems like you guys want the same thing with your nationalism, i just want it to be less militaristic, more inclusive and not necessarily profit driven
>I want to be a worker ant, the post
yeah i agree the way media treats the white working class with disdain is completely unfair, but it's not the root cause of the disintegration of traditional society, that's technology, we need to build something new to replace traditional values
>but on the other hand a collective provides a sense of meaning and being part of something greater than yourself, if you're only out for number one then your accomplishments don't really mean a lot
A lot of more traditional families and communities in America are Nationalist and rely heavily on each other.
Just because you can grow and shoot your own food, build your own stuff, support your family, don't want to pay for State redistribution of wealth (welfare), approve of Christian values and appreciate the generalizations of human nature, does NOT mean that you see nothing but yourself.
Many people rely on each other to trade skills and love the Constitution and the freedoms we have in this nation. We support our neighbors and friends, make up for each others' weak spots, but expect everyone to contribute and pull your own weight.
Private charity, NOT gov welfare.
honestly i think the analogy is pretty apt, the way humans build stuff is really similar to eusocial insects, our ability to cooperate has always been what has set us apart as a species
i get that it sucks if you're having this imposed on you and you don't want it though
This.
We have no problem helping our own blood and kin, not complete strangers
Sup Forums ironically disproves Kazynski on the technology = less traditionalism point though.
There's nothing new to build, as fantastic as sexbots and VR waifus are people absolutely need to bond on a real emotional level.
Our modern society doesn't emulate these things because it wants to fulfill your needs but because it wants to make you a slave to them by buying their "replacements".
You sound like you want the benefits of a traditional society without any of the responsibilities. How do you expect something to come to being if you're not willing to do anything to make it a reality?
Freedom of association, yes or no?
don't see a problem with it, but if you're actively calling for genocide you can see why people would be like, fuck off
You can't be far-left with that position.
(((They))) will label you a far right bigot and none of your lefie "allies" will support you simply because you can admit this.
T. One of the many Canadian lefties who realised that "progressives" want nothing more than white extinction.
>don't see a problem with it
Perfect, but then there's not really much to discuss anymore.
personally i've never really had a good time with family and i don't care that much about it, i wanna have some kind of humanist cause i can work towards, at the moment i'm applying for PhDs in neuroscience because contributing to human knowledge for everybody lie that would make me really proud
And you goys say my people are subversive lol.
>it's not the root cause of the disintegration of traditional society, that's technology
No. You can have increasing encroachment of technology replacing skills and jobs of a population, without the media pushing so hard to spread the hate of white/male/cisgender/Christian/traditional living.
Reliance on technology IS a problem, but learning the skills to do something with AND without technology is still important and has no bearing on your race/class/gender/religion.
Social engineering against the group of people who tend to be the most individualistic and merit-based is driven by people who want to increase dependence on the government and Central Banks. By controlling population growth, education, and learning the truths of human nature, you could have a society that is extremely successful and technologically advanced without losing traditional or moral values and practices.
Sometimes violence is necessary to prove a point, when enough is enough, it's time to load the guns
Who said I was in the left? I don't mind personally helping out my family and close friends with finances, I didn't say I want to help strangers
My bad I thought you were OP.
Just read all of your posts. You represent everything in the world that I despise. I do not want to be a part of a "collective". I don't want to to live with people I don't want to live with. I value liberty over equality. I like the idea that if work hard I can prosper more than some dirt bag who doesn't. I like the idea of a Christian ethno-state made up of people just like me. I don't want to live next door to niggers, spics, Jews, Muslims, etc. etc. I despise multiculturalism. I think feminism is cultural cancer.
What I want most of all is for people like you, people who hold your views, to leave me alone. I would and will gladly leave you alone. But, you cannot seem to understand that just because you want something for me and the rest of the world, that a good many of do NOT want it. Why the hell can't you just leave us all alone. Go found a nation state exactly like you want. invite everyone into your multicultural, diverse, socialist utopia. But then, leave the rest of us alone.
its cool
(I'm the same person you were talking to. I just drove home from work)
It depends on what you mean by "monoculture". I don't use that word, because the farthest logical conclusion of that ideal would seem to be absolutely boring with no outliers allowed. It is an ideal though. If I were to say "I favor monoculture over multiculture" I would mean that it would be better if my nation was less multicultural. Absolute conformity isn't possible or desirable and tolerating nonconformity is one of the things that sets white people apart from East Asians and probably one of the main reasons white people have been more innovative than East Asians despite being less intelligent.
I've been reading your posts, and I'm wondering what kind of people exactly you think you're talking to with this pro-collectivism stuff. Most of us are racial/ethnic nationalists and believe in collectivism on the basis of race/nation. The individual is still important and freedom precious - but they can't be detrimental to the people for more than what they're worth.
its sounds like you're a "back to the land" kinda guy, i think broadly thats good, but it wasn't collectivism that took people off the land and out of their villages in the first place, it was capitalists seizing land from the rural poor. that created the industrial revolution by getting all those people off the well paying land and into the poorly paying factory jobs
>i don't think thats fair.
I don't think it's fair your immune system deprives and destroys millions of cells and bacteria a day. We should infect you with AIDs so they can get a piece of the pie and feel included.
>that pic
"Multiculturalism" is usually a kind of coded way of saying "multiracialism" though, so if that's actually what you meant, I didn't mean to be so literal. The concept of a nation is based around racial and "sub-racial" considerations and there are nations all over the world, so I'm not sure what you mean saying they can't exist if you meant multiracial.
i'd argue that your point is not as important as anyones life, i've heard this virtue of violence argument before and i think it's intellectually dishonest, violence is satisfying but don't conflate that with it being ethical
You specifically don't have to associate with your family, but that doesn't mean you can't still support traditional values- why not work to find a wife and create a family you WILL love and participate in?
Find a community you CAN support and continue to research neurology but don't mistake "working for humanity" with "lefty globalism and equality everywhere!"
Do you have any desire for your descendants to look and act like you?
Violence happens when you cross the line, Commies don't believe in that since it dehumanizes people
i mean if you're pro collectivism then race seems like kind of a shitty collective, i'd much rather a humanist value set that anybody can accept
I'm really not, just a skeptic of anything related to transhumanism.
I'm sorry, but there are many differences between the races, especially with IQ and the frontal cortex
i like my own company and hate kids
i don't want to stop you loving your family at all, i just think more people are choosing not to because of things like the pill, thats fine too
Sometimes violence is necessary to prevent greater violence from happening.
Like when someone takes out a person who would have hurt/killed many more people.
Is it not more ethical to get rid of a tyrannical debt-based regime sucking up all the resources from millions of people, even if it means killing the few at the top who have organized the oppressive regime?
The larger and more divers (in all ways) a collective gets, the more difficult it is to not have a large percentage of the collective break off and work for it's own interest. If human unity was possible it would have already happened, but it's deeply against the instincts of all people - and even animals and plants.
Humanism is worse than race-based collectivism.
It's a nicer ideal but good luck getting every other race to get along despite clear biological incentives.
Race based collectivism tends to work well largely because it's not too far off from "Extended families peacefully working towards their common interest" even though there will be divisions in-between, it's a much easier-to achieve goal.
It's also worth pointing out that other races don't trust overt race-traitors very much which is why Trudeau is accepted so poorly internationally while Trump is largely respected.
making those choices is always difficult and not something any one person is sufficiantly equipped to do, but broadly yes
the oppressive regime hasn't been organised by a few at the top though, its built out of everybody acting in rational self interest, what is individually rational is often collectively disastrous, thats why we have traffic jams
>even genocide if you wanna go that far never actually works
you are 100% wrong my man. some of the greatest societies to ever grace the earth have engaged in cultural genocide.
It's not fine to have a lot of people choosing not to associate with their families.
Strong familial cohesion is important to the success of a community/country.
Values are passed through families, family helps establish the loyalty and commitment necessary to raise the next generation. Sure, not everyone needs to or will be very cohesive with their families, but having a lot of intergenerational disinterest creates a lot of internal struggle and sabotage.
Freedom of association at the individual level, but overall society should favor strong interpersonal ties and cohesive families.
Hi pol, i'm a proper cancer cell and i want to engage you in peaceful dialogue
i understand that traditional biology make a lot of people really happy, having a sense of neurological function is really important, and a homeostasis and anaerobic reactions and blood flow provide that, but they also exclude anyone who doesn't fit into that ideal traditional mould of a cell, i don't think thats fair.
>the oppressive regime hasn't been organised by a few at the top though, its built out of everybody acting in rational self interest, what is individually rational is often collectively disastrous, thats why we have traffic jams
This is a pretty good example because the obvious solution is central planning, but the consequences of central planning always have to reduce liberty. Traffic is a benign example, but there are many over areas where people recommend central planning that the erosion of liberty is clearly not worth it.
>the oppressive regime hasn't been organised by a few at the top though
Lol.
Yes it has. Why do such few people have so much money and power? Pretty exclusive club at the top. Some long-standing ties keep a few at the top (not that it's impossible to break in).
People don't always act in "rational" self interest. Many do, but power corrupts rationality. Because of greed, certain people act in self interest that is beyond rationality.
i have a masters in neuroscience and we constantly laugh at psychologists about how IQ is total bollocks, it measures how good you are at taking exams, not much else
i've never seen a paper showing a difference in frontal cortex sizes between races
the "everyone thinks they're smarter than people different to them" explanation makes a lot more sense with to me my understanding of how the brain works, "brainpower" isn't really a thing, its all about skill in individual tasks which can be learned
Love this example. The West is full of tumors at this point.
This is why personal liberty is so important, to prevent centralization of power and prevent corruption. And empowering people by giving them an upbringing that follows the traditional values highly aligned with biological norms helps enforce personal responsibility, objective reality, development of skills, rational interpersonal dependence and bartering, establishment of free market principles, etc.
IQ (or any other observed level of problem solving ability) between races despite having similar brain characteristics could be explained by different races disproportionately being affected by different levels of disgenics.
It doesn't need to be strictly biological to correlate with race.
that liberty gets eroded by capitalism too, your resources are drained to the top and that prevents you from accomplishing what you otherwise might have, making society a competition wastes smart people on menial tasks
How about delayed gratification?
Doesn't that correlate highly with IQ and success in gathering resources?
Can you explain why certain races have made leaps and bounds in terms of tool (technological) development and efficient use of resources, while others maintained pretty stagnant growth for centuries?
I know climate has a lot to do with development of delayed gratification and understanding more abstract concepts and calculations.
Your lack of periods and capital letters is really triggering my autism.
IQ is correlated with many things that are associated with intelligence, but I'm not prepared with the details of the argument.
Here are some Jared Taylor videos, at least one of which was censored by youtube for being "hateful" that might give you a more clear perspective than the random people replying to your thread.
youtu.be
I don't disagree with that, but again traditionalism and nationalism would have prevented the worst effects of capitalism.
Can't you see that the elites are using universalists to undermine human liberty from every angle?
Oh also please explain melanocortin and the relationship of darker skin pigmentation with higher levels of violence and sexuality in many animals including humans (as supported with FBI crime statistics and birth rates compared between different races).
>archive.is
The values that people on the right want others to conform to are pretty universal and easily committal. Such as don't kill, don't commit battery or assault, speak English, be self-sufficient if it is in your capacity to do so, don't get emotional when your individual values aren't reflected in the rest of society, don't suppress other peoples' speech, etc.. There are black, gay, Hispanic conservatives, there are LGBTQ+ people that don't feel they are 'oppressed', there are women who don't cry for equality every single day. People don't fit in because they believe they can't or they believe its too big a task, which it isn't. This is because the principles and values conservatives try to uphold in today's society really do not ask for much. All most people in Sup Forums want is for leftists to stop whining for once and concentrate on their own individuals. Work, pay your taxes, immigrate to countries legally, adopt the values that make a country what it is, etc
well i'm not an anthropologist but as i understand it there are a few interlocking reasons
for a start, lots of people reject technological advancement because they're happy with the lives they have, much like you guys wanting to keep your traditions at the expense of convenience
secondly, a lot of amazing stuff was built by supposedly primitive people but in completely different ways to western civilization, for example african tribes had some incredible medical abilities, they were performing caesarians long before europe, consistantly and safely too, some tribes could also make carbon steel when nobody but sri lanka could do it and they developed it totally independantly
>i don't think thats fair.
no one gives a shit nancy. kys
>liberty gets eroded by capitalism too, your resources are drained to the top
In a true free market, resources are drained to those with the most intelligence and skills at gathering resources. However, society is more productive and resources are more easily gathered when people's roles correlate with what they like to do and they are healthy (have good working conditions).
So a true free market would actually support the smartest, most capable people running businesses with good conditions and pay (to keep workers happy and productive) to gather the most resources in the long run.
You would also have lots of competition regulated by consumer choice, and the majority of people who were not adept at running their own business would be able to find a job in another business or be able to trade with colleagues for their own supplies in freedom of association and personal property
>i couldn't call that a good society for my children
don't worry about it. You'll never get laid anyway.
Life isnt fair.
>Genocide
Why do you always think it is about genocide? Repatriation is far more effective.
correlation does not equal causation, if you're good at tests you're probably gonna do well in school and therefore life,
as someone who knows a great deal about how the brain works, the idea that intelligence is measurable in something like an IQ test is laughable, its stuck around because psychology is full of horseshit pseudoscience backed up by poorly designed experiments, its not an entirely worthless subject but pretty often their terms are so poorly defined that the experiments don't actually say anything at all
I don't want to exclude people that are different then me. Otherwise I would be no better than a Commie.
I'd like to find out what happened to those inventions
Also, measuring these intelligence capabilities must be taken in context- like did these previous tribes/societies have a few people on the high end of the bell curve that made everything, or was society fairly evenly distributed? Because it's the generalized IQ that has mean intelligence at ~80 up to ~106 for specific races. It's not a few shining stars that define the whole race.
Why did they have only these inventions in specific fields but could not improve tool use over a variety of needs?
I'm not trying to call these people stupid, as our society has advantages and disadvantages compared to these previous people, but just saying that there are genetic factors that are highly correlated to successful resource gathering and can be developed more in certain races.
i mean the armenian genocide springs to mind
plus theres the people who actually grew up in your country and don't know anything about their supposed homeland but have the wrong skin colour
We don't like niggers because they cause problems
well when you don't have a written language all it takes is one generation to be seperated from their oral traditions to forget everything, that happened in africa a lot
They're being dishonest.
the racial segregation in america really astounds me, like, these people are just as american as you
sucks for them
you know nothing about american history, negros were never a part of it, all they did was pick cotton and cause the deaths of 300,000 americans to "free" them, and look where they are now
i mean it kinda sucks for us too, i wanna know about african myths and legends and shit but that knowledge is just gone for the most part
In my country gays are burnt alive and women are confined to their kitchens, I'm quite happy about that. If you think the vermin that the left labels as "refugees" are going to bring prosperity, then you should check other nations where they are a majority.
Also, what is your opinion on the rape and general crime rates hiking massively in every country that chooses to abandon its people and traditions, instead choosing to be willingly infested by aliens?
yeah i mean, this is not something i can even begin to understand or agree with, sorry
Racial segregation is found throughout history. The word Slave came from Slav on the Barbary Coast where whites were enslaved.
It's tribalism and protection of genetic lines.
Obviously everyone has baseline value as a human and we shouldn't discriminate solely on race, but when you have high amounts of violence and an apparent inability to accept the NAP or personal responsibility present in a large portion of the race, people start to notice generalizations.
I can't imagine that everyone in Britain embraces all the muslims that moved there, when they're encroaching on western values and cultures.
>africa
>culture
pick one
You, I like you, I wish our women were as subservient as ours, maybe we would have never had problems
alright guys its been fun but its 6AM here and i'm shattered, i hope you've gained some insight into my perspectives and maybe don't think everyone on the left is a monster
sorry if i diddn't respond to everyone satisfactorily, typing takes a while
i understand where you guys are coming from i just think your positions lack a little nuance, in a lot of ways we want the same things
have a good one lads, try and be kinder to the left, i know they have silly coloured hair and are kinda immasculine but they're desperately searching more meaning in the world just like you
African warlords took over other tribes, enslaved them, sold them on Jewish ships to the Americas. A small portion went to North America. They became slaves to
Give them an inch and they'll take a mile, that applies to all the groups wrecking havoc in your country, coons, fags, beans, women,.. You made the mistake of giving them a few too many rights that they thought they should never demanding more.
>try and be kinder to the left, i know they have silly coloured hair and are kinda immasculine but they're desperately searching more meaning in the world just like you
Lol wrong They like entertainment and larping like they're doing something but they REFUSE to learn or even consider other points of view, ergo they don't really care about truth