Brit/pol/ : Cheeky Jenna Edition
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
marxists.org
youtu.be
youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
theins.ru
twitter.com
First for pats.
Every effort spared, nice. Ill forgive cos jenna.
Dimbleby is quitting QT, lads
Why? Too old?
you haven't explained why the propagation of genes by genes can be objectively said to be morally good.
I'm a Christian
Why contain it? Let it spill over to the schools and churches, let the bodies pile up in the streets. In the end they'll beg us to save them.
which conversation are you replying to?
Start buying guns.
Probably. He's been doing it for 25 years. Kirsty Young or Victoria Derbyshire faves to take over.
the quintessentially fashy repressed gay.
>drive down my dead end road that's being sucked into a sinkhole
no because there's fuck all there and you don't matter
it's the end of an era
i wonder who might replace him?
Okay, sweetie. Live in delusion and superstition, but just let the rest of the civilised world go ahead into the new millennium without you, okay?
see
i like vicky
but i think kirsty is more likely
vicky has her morning show every weekday
arguing with a nihilist is like arguing with a terminally ill patient who insists his illness is the future
oh God either of them would be awful..
welcome to 4cocks
how does if feel to be supporting the homosexual agenda with your patronage of this site?
Not marally good. Good from an evolutionary perspective, a species standpoint. Our dna is in a manner of speaking immortal. Our main biological objective is to ensure it is passed on. Gays are designed to fail at this most critical biological function. How is that not an aberration?
This drive is so strong, in many species individuals will literally give up their lives to mate. The sex instinct is one of the strongest there is, but its purpose is lost in gays.
Anyway, the point was to show rational argument against homosexuality. Whether you believe im right or wrong in my arguments, i think i have done this.
a nigger or a woman
what about you?
how does if feel to be supporting the homosexual agenda with your patronage of this site?
lulu you need to calm down
>How is that not an aberration?
it's not binary for most mate
go read up on it
feels gay man
>mishima
>repressed
no desu
they need redpilling about sex and sexuality
and Jow Forums tbqf
Cheers senpai!
I'm always thirsty for pats.
High Tories on Twitter now advocating for America-tier gun laws. Utter state.
so long as you're getting into the vibe
pun intended
i'm worried i've created a monster
i'm blocked desu
youtube.com
Strange lot they are.
In one of the most Comprehensive studies of civilizational decline ‘Sex and Culture’ J.D, Unwin puts forth that the main driver for the rise of a civilisation is the degree of chastity of said civilisations women. Unwin’s motivation to carry out his research was the Freudian theory that civilizational progress was the result of repressed sexuality. Unwin writes ‘The whole of human history does not contain a single instance of a group becoming civilized unless it has been absolutely monogamous, nor is there any example of a group retaining its culture after it has adopted less rigorous customs’.
When you challenge heteronormativity in a civilisation you devalue and decentralise the family, this is an axiom. If we take Unwins theory to be true the consequence of this is the end of the civilisation. Show me a civilisation without clear heteronormativity and i'll show you a weak and dying civilisation.
umm but civilisation is a racist white supremacist concept
Srsly? Fucking sweet, i thought they were a bunch of buffoons.
>HG Wells interviewed Stalin
marxists.org
Ambitious crossover.
what a load of crap
greeks were gay as fuck for years
muslims and mormons had had polygamy as their societies grew power
that post is like a fucking joke mate
1. mental states supervene upon physical states (no ontological dualism).
2. even if the mind emerges from the body (so that there is property dualism rather than ontological dualism), mental states can neither cause each other nor physical states (no downward causation).
You are left with either reduction or emergence. The former implies no mind or consciousness, and the latter can only achieve it at the level of projection (epiphenomenalism).
There is no free-will, soul, independent mind, or God.
American gun laws are shite. We need to go back to pre-Firearms Act 1920 laws.
stop taking to the troll desu
>tolerance is the last virtue of a dying civilisation
Don't attack me attack Unwin
stop posting crap then
you stupid cunt
Very interesting.
>>Don't attack me attack Unwin
he's wrong
and you're wrong for repeating his wrongness here
IMAGINE ADVOCATING FOR AMERICAN-TIER GUN LAWS WHILST THE COUNTRY IS TURNING INTO A MUSLIM-NIGGER INFESTED HELLHOLE
PFFFFBHWAHAHAHAH OHH NOOOO
NO NOOOOOOO NOOOO
Your idea of truth is wrong
Truth is a tool, like the pincer on the crab
If I meet a guy in the street, don't know him, he doesn't know me. We are currently 'equal'. As soon as sexuality is expressed (which I have no interest in) and it turns out he's gay, he becomes 'oppressed', I become the 'oppressor'. Inequality on a 1 to 1 basis is produced by virtue of the gay needing to inform others of his gayness. You do it.
>mental states can neither cause each other nor physical states
Bullshit. Imagine a mans arse. That thought construct trigger a physiological reaction? Increased heartrate, yor fagstick get a bit of a chub? Mind is what the brain does, and the brain controls you.
idk who this is but she is absolutely beautiful
>Good from an evolutionary perspective, a species standpoint
Evolutionary perspective and species standpoint is reducible to genetic standpoint.
So when I ask, "why is genetic propagation good?" you reply
"genetic propagation is good from a genetic standpoint."
"why is it good for genes to propagate from the perspective of genes, though genes have no consciousness and so no perspective"
"the function of genes is to propagate, so genes propagate is fulfilling their function"
Your point is then reducible to "genes propagate" which is trivial and meaningless.
Fucking hell, I made the horrible mistake of watching the BBCs propaganda series.
This gay, mixed-race "poet" and his laughable platitudes are all the argument they need for the destruction of Europe, apparently. "I-if there weren't immigrants, you wouldn't have so much exciting food! O-or tea! This panel of mixed-race and non-Europeans all agree."
dumb larp
probably leftypol
probably why i'm block because i see through it
>>Your idea of truth is wrong
wft
just pointed out that the statement you provide is not supported by fact
and provided counter examples showing where it's wrong
care to comment on muslims or morons rising power with polygamy?
are we doing gays again this thread?
brilliant one of my fave subjects
i think you're out of luck desu
good thing its hard for niggers to get guns right? oh wait its only annoying and difficult for law abiding citizens
Mods. How the fuck is this allowed on POL but if I post actual political questions I get banned?
Jenna is hot though.
I only bring it up because he mentions it. He shows other leftists he has plenty of diversity points and is therefore correct about what "British identity" is and why it's so brilliant.
If you're going to infer general truths from history, especially ones that show a causality between a specific, observable sexual relationship and the less easily measured "decline" of a civilisation (in which you can argue circularly by assuming that deviation from monogamy is evidence of decline so that in all instances of deviation from monogamy society has declined--which is a pseud mistake). But if you are to claim that there is a causal relationship then show me a statistical paper which reveals a significant relationship please.
Some random reactionary's opinion is not an argument just because he wrote a book.
if the thread didnt exist you would have faggots like in this thread or guys like eddie roaming the board
do you want that?
SHES A RIGHT PROPER SLAG AYE LADS?
He's not a random reactionary
Why do the IRA have better music than us bros? WE NEED MORE TIME!
youtube.com
He's not a random reactionary
No, for the species to continue, we must procreate. Thats why its 'good'. Ok imagine the gay bomb goes off, everyone wakes up a fag tomorrow. What happens, it it good from a human evolutionary standpoint? No, we are dead as a species in one generation. Reductio ad absurdum, but this is effectively what the gay population does at the individual level. Your biological instinct to procreate, to continue the species with your specific genetic lineage has been nullified. No morality, just evolutional biology and species imperative.
If our main biological purpose is to pass on our dna - whats yours Now?
your argument is circular, you are assuming the thing you're trying to prove.
okay retard, slither away from argument into meaningless metaphors. Even your metaphor is retarded.
You are not even contesting my definition of truth, but the application of it. You are basically arguing "okay, you're right, but why does it matter?" and that's a separate argument I don't want to have tonight.
Because your argument can't be disproven
It's a dead end
'Why does it matter?' is exactly what i'm saying.
kys kike ennbler
we try threads warning about mossad and the (((alt-right))) and our threads get deleted
don't believe me look in the archive for brit/pol threads that got deleted
theins.ru
>175535388
>Welcome to 4cocks
>your one stop shop for free online penis
>These are provided free at the point of need
>and are paid for by your web traffic
>Please continue to use 4cocks as
>your political social media forum
>as this helps keep the cocks free for everyone
and much more than this
pedos and hypnotising lads to think they're little girls
all sorts of weird shit
you really need to investigate this site better and think again wherever you really to support this place by being part of it's community
>The sky is blue
HAHAHAH btfo you can't disprove it
Would you not agree with this?
don't care who you're quoting desu
it's still clearly not true
care to address my points about polygamy?
Papers coming in lads
>>care to address my points about polygamy?
put papers in your name or something?
then i can link straight to them in tomorrow morning's thread
>stealth tax
b-but brexit dividend?
these 'civilisations' didn't achieve what monogamous civilisations did
they were only able to achieve the minor things they did through lesser repressed sexuality
How can you compare polygamous islam or mormonism to the british empire or rome, it's laughable.
>POLES OUT
>PAKIS IN
>GLOBAL BREIT BRITAIN
you all got played by jews desu
>british empire
>rome
dead
>islam or mormonism
growing
you're right
there's no comparison
>>there's no comparison
it's laughable desu
Why do I need to put papers in my name? Just link them anyway.
>for the species to continue, we must procreate. Thats why its 'good'.
For the species (which serves to propagate genes) to continue, we much propagate genes. So genetic propagation is good because genes propagate. The above is trivial, and you are defining "good" only in that gene propagation exists.
You are actually accepting moral nihilism, and so you have no moral argument against homosexuality.
Now, you have rested your whole argument on homosexuality does not allow the propagation of genes. Your mistake here is that you are assuming genes operate on an individual level and not a genetic level. You are falling into the trap of ascribing genes to individuals (which we have both accepted is a mistake). A young, childless man may die to protect his tribe who are genetically similar because he is only one aspect of the gene who has been sacrificed to protect the gene as a whole. So childless men who die protecting genes, and homosexuals who have societal functions in protecting genes while not individually passing genes on, still indirectly pass on genes though the protection of them.
Now you have neither a moral or evolutionary argument against homosexuality. I have other people to respond to now, so this is goodnight for this conversation.
but i'll end up link all your posts
if you just add papers i'll only get the ones with papers
why can't my argument be disproven?
All civilisations go through cycles and end.
What those civilisations achieved far far far outweighs and will outweigh what any polygamous 'civilisation' will achieve. Sexual enery is transmuted for cultural pursuits. If women are chaste then culture is high. Monogamy is the most effective system for this. Hence why the world 3 major religions are all monogamous.
Cringe
>>but i'll end up link all your posts
because my search tools is a bit primitive
i've expanded it to spy on country flags
but there's no easy way to filter out non paper posts if you don't tag them
Well it could be but I'd be dishonest.
Literally who gives a fuck about Ant and his wife
>>All civilisations go through cycles and end.
and your claim was that polygamy and homosexuality was a sign of decline
but i've offered these examples of rising civilisations and you're btfo
just admit it
unwin is shit
okay, prove
1. causality between mental states.
2. downward causation between mental states and physical states.
If you can, just wander into Cambridge University (like Wittgenstein did) and change the world of philosophy.
It's actually coming home
>kiss his boot luck
it woz the sun wot won it