Hellish onions boi race mixer/traitor tranny socialist faggot here with pen and pad ready to learn

>I'm here to learn so expect good faith discussion from me.
If you wanted a good faith argument, you came the wrong place

I think there are leftists who dont believe in a tabula rasa situation as well.
I would count myself among them.
I would however say that all leftists are mostly antiessentialist when it comes to that nature.
In other words we think our nature, even if already established in one state, can be reshaped and transmuted into another. Also that part of our nature is to BE reshaped.

Is that something ya disagree with?

An mem for ur troubles

Attached: FB_IMG_1539345935221.jpg (480x607, 44K)

I think to be on the right contains a measure of essentialism. Things can be altered to a degree from their original state, to a different one, but give the limited time, resources and energy, it makes the best sense to find the most apt role for each piece.

We could, over generations, breed horses for milk, and cattle for racing. But for what reason?

That's a fair point.

From what I've heard from Jordan Peterson this sounds like Pragmatism.

Would you say so and if you agree would you say pragmatism is the right wing philosophy par excellence?

Follow up question will be if exceptional pragmatic utility can be derived from leftist positions or synthesis with them would that be acceptable?
On the same note if leftist abandoned non pragmatic positions would cosmetic political differences matter?

(Yes I'm aware this begs the question as to what is cosmetic)

You can certainly shape your nature, thus the hard work and discipline, but you can't break it and to even bend it takes great mastery of will. If you look at the story of Adam and eve its fundamentally about humans defying their preordained nature and the huge cost that's comes as a result. Nature can be changed but something must be paid in trade, politics basically boils down to not which rights we have but what sacrifices we want to make so we can live in something that's tolerable.

How do we establish what is immutable in nature and what is tolerably "bendable"

Attached: nigger.jpg (480x272, 20K)

Trial and error regrettably, what is tolerable is pretty subjective and philosophically its not even clear we can reliably perceive reality. Its why I personally think the democractic process and free speech are essential, but others will disagree. You should also consider that the 'right' is pretty diverse, I'm not sure thinking about things in terms of binary political wings will be helpful.

>Would you say so and if you agree would you say pragmatism is the right wing philosophy par excellence?
There are definite elements of pragmatism within right wing ideologies (to various degrees) but pure pragmatism isnt really an ideology, as much as it is a survival tactic. Pure pragmatism as an ideology would be pretty right wing though

>Follow up question will be if exceptional pragmatic utility can be derived from leftist positions or synthesis with them would that be acceptable?
Depends on the leftist position, but absolutely. Fascism, seen as one of the most "extreme" of right wing ideologies, has plenty of leftist positions.
>On the same note if leftist abandoned non pragmatic positions would cosmetic political differences matter?
Not as much at this point, but lately, even the most normie-tier lefty is pushing for fantastically unfeasible policies across the board

It's a tricky thing since what is Pragmatic for me, may not be Pragmatic for you

cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R001700210016-5.pdf

>start here

I think I was unconsciously trying to justify a binary with the "far right/left" qualifier and yeah you're right I should respect the diversity.

I love required reading thanks.

>Define loaded terms
>Tries to mock our labels right out the door

Fuck off commie scum.

Also, Marx's analysis about capital inherently leading to homogenization is retarded, Europe has been pseudocapitalistic for thousands of years without homogenity.

>pure pragmatism isnt really an ideology, as much as it is a survival tactic. Pure pragmatism as an ideology would be pretty right wing though

This totally flies in the face of my understanding of the world so bear with me.

How is anything we can conceive of not ideology?

To my knowledge the closest we can get to a non ideological state is like Zen Satori.

How can we dehumanize jews, commies and insects who were never human to begin with?

In the absence a reliable measure of reality, constructs such as left and right wing are inevitable and provide a helpful framework to have dialogue and synthesis, the danger comes when people mistake the constructs for reality itself. I feel like many of the questions your asking would have in previous generations have been within the realm of religion and philosophy, with the collapse of spirituality in the west I fear we are putting a load onto political systems they were never designed or intended to deal with.

It was just banter and I apologize for offense. None was intended.

I sincerely dont understand what you mean by capitalistic though.

Can you um... can you define your terms... lol I'm sorry.

Capitalism as in a mercantilistic production based society where implied value/wealth that always superseded raw material bartering.

I meant that specifically in terms of Pragmatism, which I've always defined loosely as "the simple solution." ie, what will get you what you want/need in the fewest steps. However, that's not really an ideology as it's more reactive to events externally and internally and relies more on gut feeling than higher level thinking, which to me is necessary for an ideology. I understand what you're trying to say that in a sense, anything we create that is non-physical is in essence an ideology as it is ephemeral and technically a thought form. However since pragmatism has a root in our more basal "lizard brain" I tend to not think of it in ideological terms.

The language barrier probably doesn't help, lol

I big time agree with this.

Left and right are difficult to use.

On the one hand where I think they are useful is as the relative terms of their origin.

The original left sat to the left of robespierre and right to his right and they sat in opposition because those on the left wanted more power in the hands of the common person and those to the right wanted to reinstate a new monarchy.

Left and right as they are used now are totally lost from that clear division.
Like desu the U.S. second ammendment ought to be a classical leftist position.
If by it we mean a position of power to the people.

Furthermore its become an issue of values.
Like the values ought inform the politics not the other way around right? Big discussion in there.

NPC was a forced meme, never forget.

Attached: 00D1A0FA-CA06-4CE3-81C4-C89EDEB73143.jpg (750x499, 255K)

>Reddit spacing
Opinion dismissed

I get you and I appreciate your contributions.
Thanks for the responses.

I'm not offering an opinion I asked some questions lol.

forced by the Jews and then repurposed by anons

and now we have it causing a global awakening

Attached: smugpc.png (244x206, 6K)

>look mom I stole the ebil Nazi's meme!
>lolol I am so woke!

Attached: 1513080485051.jpg (469x600, 245K)

Not at all kike. It's been percolating for months.

Also, I appreciate that you did legitimately come for good faith discussions

Holy shit... BASED

Are you really this upset?

Hello there. To answer your question, there's not much difference between far right and far left ideologies. In fact, calling it far "right" is intellectually disingenuous. The overlap of race bait politicking on both "sides" is key here; the only difference being which race is superior, inferior, and at fault for destroying our way of life. For the extreme right, is the Juwes. For the extreme left, its the whites. Neither are inherently correct nor incorrect. Most people, not including those who signal their beliefs routinely on social media, believe that the system in place works, as their families have massively benefited over the years from capitalist structures. Even when far left or right adherents say the system is rigged, the "normies" realize that they are well fed, have a car, and are using an iPhone.

The one glaring difference I can see from the extremes is that, at least on Jow Forums, shitposting is very refined. Shitposting on a lefty board results in a prompt ban, having the effect of self censorship and group think. The left is also highly clique-ish, and snarky about it too. A visit to DailyKos is all you need to prove it. However, those on the right, excluding the unironic NatSoc bunch (who are also lefties, but to avoid confusion, considered far right), are extremely welcoming. I see a system where if you scratch my back, I will scratch yours. Not a system where you scratch my back, because I demand reparations.

Because of the lefts snarky attitude towards new adherents, coupled with self censorship, anything they say is taken extremely seriously. Whilst those on the right, are not. That has the effect of limiting the lefts ability to call the right out for something like the NPC meme. Whereas, all it takes is a Sarah Jeong demanding the death of whites to start bleeding off normie support (something both sodes are fighting for). She is taken seriously: new york times, blue checkmark, big following compared to normal folks.

Personally, I don't want either side to "win". Because then we become socialist. It doesn't matter in the end how we get there, the result is a consolidation of power to a central authority. If you don't make the cut, you don't get the same quality of life we enjoy right now, nor the prospect of a better life. And making the cut gets increasingly difficult as the standards for the "perfect demographic" shifts to meet the demands of the state.

In short, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. The far left and the far right are two sides of the same coin my friend.

Spotted the shitlord.

Attached: 9C4C29B3-E37B-4C34-941F-F58C5017FC41.jpg (640x479, 70K)

>p zombie

NPC detected.

Perpetrators always clad themselves in victimhood. It's what I call the Serb sentiment.

Reddit has infested this place

I don't like reddit. I just use spacing because it helps seperate my train of thought. If anything, having to explain my grammer here is very reddit-tier.

Leftism dictates racelessness, it states quite literally that ethnic interests are just embezzled economic interests, meaning any ethnicity, including any race or nation that pertains to it, is just a human figment and not included in the substance of material reality.

Also the obsession with the character rather than the substance reeks of reddit identitarianism.

Regardless, this thread has been a nice break from shitposting. It seems a bit too enlightened for me though; I don't think I can contribute much, other than my simple observations. Best of luck to OP and I hope he doesn't get AIDS from choking on diseased black cock. For once.

You're right. From watching American socialists rise in power I've noticed a lot of race-baiting as a conduit for class division. As that gains traction I feel leftists have shifted strategies unto the same goal.

But the hardware and firmware IS objectively better. That's what faggots don't understand.

Attached: 1517100650408.jpg (762x1024, 65K)

My understanding of leftist race theory is that ethnicity and nationality have a material basis but race is merely socially constructed.
However social constructs have their own material basis.

Especially under an orthodox Marxist lense everything is reduced to materialism of some sort.

Thx 4 u r best wishes

What if I told you I was a gay commie christian

Then we would call you a heretic.

>ethnicity and nationality have a material basis
>not race

What is the difference?

Language is a social construct used to communicate the material world. When a pharmaceutical company is stock ordering certain heart medications for certain groups, they don't put on the medical guidelines "optimal use for socially constructed enclave #23573", they put "African Heritage" or what have you to avoid confusion. Lefties seemingly have a problem when language is used in any other way besides utility for the described group, rather then that of the speaker, and even more specificly towards Whites.

You can't commit charity by force, and calling yourself a gay Christian is akin to calling myself a rageful or lustful Christian.

this. The left simply cannot meme.

Attached: 1406416137378.jpg (344x374, 61K)

I sincerely doubt this person is actually a faggot. They seem to be somewhat intelligent, which means they must have by now examined the fact that they cannot honestly call themselves a Christian and also a faggot. All the church fathers would have them burned at the stake

Generally what is said is that race was socially constructed in the sense that it didnt have a basis in useful scientific biological categories but ethnicity does.

For example Irish or Italian may be somewhat wieldable categories for scienc/medicine but "white" is not.

I don't advocate forceful anything except self defense and/or self determination, and I dont even really dig charity.
Solidarity > charity imo
I'm a libertarian socialist

But this isnt a debate thread so I'll just agree.

CAPITAL is the accrual of the means to invest in specific ventures.
> Hey! Lets build a moon base!
Some will think it a bad idea, they would need convincing for investment (including those who invest on behaf of others. Pensions etc)
CAPITALISTS milk economies with pervasive marketing and things that are not comodified get pushed aside for that that is.

A mem 4 ur troubles

Attached: FB_IMG_1539261693108.jpg (700x417, 41K)

Fpbp

Well, of course we agree with that. But we have also observed that shared white skin pigmentation among some races is similarly accompanied by certain other social traits. As a counter example there are plenty of fair skinned jews and also albino niggers. Skin color is just a helpful visual label, not always completely accurate, but often very helpful, for other traits observed to be in common.

I would also point out that humans do not process color in the way that the left purports. Facial shapes are just as recognizable as skin colors. Everyone knows the difference between a Kenyan and your average american nigger. Furthermore it is easy to tell the difference between a German and a Jew, even if the jew is particularly pale-skinned. Skin color is simply the easiest way that we have to talk about a particular set of traits.

What is that set of traits? The traits that have characterized the western world: religious affection, intelligence, philosophical leaning, ingenuity of design, discipline, force of creativity, imperialistic tendencies... Not that other people groups have never exhibited these traits before, but that there is a certain order (or perhaps prioritizing) of these traits that is *markedly* white.

And it is also not that an individual person from another race might not fit into that society. But the race as a whole will drift towards its characteristics. And the higher the percentage, the more the nation will drift toward those characteristics. This is the reason that until 1965 very few of any race except for white europeans were allowed to enter the US.

As far as races and peoples changing, that may be the core distinction between the ideologies. However, we can both agree that if they do change, it would have to be through a very, very long time, long enough to change the genetics of that race.

But the irony is, changing the genetics *is* changing the ethnicity.

I'm a Quaker.
We have exegesis differences is all.

White can be useful for taxanomic groupings, just at a higher level.

All humans are humans, and a smaller number are white, and an even smaller number are, say, germanic. Or anglo, etc.

Just as all canines are canines, a smaller number are foxes, and an even smaller number are red foxes. Or arctic foxes, etc. But all foxes will be biologically more closely related than just all canines.

>Quaker
>name comes from "tremble at the word of God"
>" If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Leviticus 20:13

Start trembling faggot

I see your point but the question is what is the medical or scientific accuracy of the taxonomy?

Yes it's not enough to just say "well you can be more accurate so this lower resolution category isnt helpful". The left is also saying there isnt a useful scientific application for racial categories that isnt better explained by sociology than biological essentialism.

However that's just their claim and I am not prepared for a debate on that.

I'll take what is exegesis for 500.

Whats your sociological explanation for niggers? Try your hardest to explain the whole continent of africa

>For the extreme right, is the Juwes. For the extreme left, its the whites. Neither are inherently correct nor incorrect.
I disagree. Powerful Jews and organizations can be observed to by systematically influencing policy to subvert the majority consensus, and leading prosperous nations to an already observed future of higher crime and violence. If you were making the same argument during British colonial times I would be more agnostic, but the era of whites as aggressors is long over, and having the 20/20 hindsight of post colonial Africa, I would argue that it has been a net positive for Africans, especially compared to what the Bantus did to the tribes of Africa.

>Neoconservative interventionist war
>false flag attacks
>selective lobbying and shaming of gentiles to push replacement migration as part of what is a 'liberal experiment' at best and intentional Kalergi school genocide at the worst youtube.com/watch?v=TW38xni5PxE
>pushes for social change to destroy the nuclear family
All of these have been pushed by Jews in disproportionate numbers using Jewish organizational and institutional power, and even bragged about. Whites lost the social tug of war after the Vietnam War, and have been doing nothing but placidly resist being dragged into nonexistence ever since.
This video has a fucking cringey intro and JF can be annoying, but I urge you to at least lend an ear to the information introduced by the Jewish attorney in this video. youtube.com/watch?v=KyjgZrNRKtM
If you have the time for it, I would recommend the last video to you too. Cynthia Mckinney's experience on US congress, and this information are what my major 'right wing' critiques of status quo government are based on.

Attached: organizations.jpg (2909x2068, 1.35M)

question is what *isn't just* the medical or scientific accuracy

I'd rather hear what yall have to say about it.

>be me
>faggot
>quaker
>read lev 20:13
>shit
>fuck
>shit
>am abomination
>god hates that
>fuck

QUICK SOMEBODY EXEGETE

>secure trip
Hahahahahahahahahahaha faggot no one wants to be you. Trust me.

I believe that blacks are happiest when they are under white rule. Its most suited to their nature. They can be hard workers when under strict authority and can get a lot done. On their own they tend toward killing each other and raping each other.

If you're an evolutionist, the explanation is that they evolved in a harsher environment where intelligence was favored less than brutishness.

If you're a Christian like myself, God designed different races for different things. Blacks are closer to the earth, musical, good at dancing and things having to do with the body. Meant to be ruled. Whites are loftier, more intellectual, meant to lead. Different purposes for different races. Read lewis about it (space trilogy)

Attached: npc doctrine.jpg (840x464, 195K)

OP unironically living the smuggie life

Attached: kyssmuggiefag.jpg (1024x610, 76K)

you need more eric striker in your life

Will look into it thanks.

Oh hai mark

Attached: B2979FFC-0F40-4475-9033-1C1CA3744A6E.png (1280x720, 1.16M)

liberals dehumanize themselves faggot

Since you're taking book suggestions, and claim to be a Christian, read "Out of the Silent Planet" by C. S. Lewis. Read in between all the lines, I think he makes an excellent race argument.

left can't meme.
fuck off faggot.

Will do.

your pseudocode shows how extremely bad you are at programming and logic. says enough about how the rest of your opinion is retarded and can safely be disregarded

I'm not a programmer at all so... yes

why do so many dip shits come from that one part of spain? your country is fucking awful

I'm actually Amerifat from Livingston Texas.
Catalonia is just Libertarian-Socialist memes.

Do you think a Chinese elite have a shot at overtaking this Jew dictatorship?
Would that be good or bad in your opinion?

All tripfags deserve to be gassed

NPCs are on both sides of the political spectrum. The majority of them are currently lefties due to mass media programming but think about the moron Christians who oppose globalism whole proselytizing one religion around the world.

>I'm a libertarian socialist

An oxymoron-

Libertarian - values personal freedom, private property, and minimal inference of the state. Citizens are independent and self reliant.

Socialism - No private property, property is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.. Maximize the size of government and government intervention in the lives of its citizens. Citizens are dependant upon the State.
You can not be dependant and still be free.
Government is the only organization specifically granted the power to use force to achieve its goals.

You meant to say non-authoritarian socialist, more than likely you're just a socialist who doesn't want to ban sexual degeneracy and freedom of speech (unless it offends you?).

>help they keep calling us NPCs what do we do
>I know I’ll call them NPC’s back
Shut up faggot if I wanted my own cum back I’d wipe it off your chin

You just define things differently than I but you're entitled to that ofc.
Thanks for your point of view.

Not at all. Libertarian was invented because the left expropriated the term 'liberal'.

Libertarian's are what we now know as classic liberals, they believe in private property and small government.

When and where was the term libertarian invented?
And by who?