Incels briefly occupying the interest of mainstream journalists and academics was a good litmus test of whether the supposedly revolutionary '68 episteme actually exists, i.e., whether several generations of "postmodern thinking" and non-stop deconstruction of all traditional norms, hierarchies, and "power-knowledge" actually made human beings fundamentally more compassionate, understanding, or adept at identifying systemic oppression and subaltern voices at the everyday level.
What happens when a completely monstrous black person tortures and murders some white child or shoots a cop in the face in cold blood? The institutionalized postmodernists rush in to remind everyone that institutions are structurally and systemically oppressive, and that this unfortunate individual incident shouldn't blind us to the structural factors that gradually and systemically caused the young black person to lash out.
We shouldn't simply follow our gut and say "pull yourself up by your bootstraps! Murder and violence are never justified, and no matter how oppressed you are, you aren't entitled to cruelty, hatred, spite, or resentment!" We should constantly remind ourselves against all our instincts that we're occupying the uphill, superior position, the easier position to hold, and we're shouting down at someone who is barely surviving, using this tragedy to justify keeping the structures of oppression in place because "it's fundamentally the individual's responsibility and the individual's guilt." We're supposed to resist the urge to shoot from the hip, and use abstruse Marxian analysis to figure out that resentment-fueled violence really isn't the perpetrator's "fault," but the fault of complex social structures and language-embedded injustices.
But then when a white guy starts expressing some ennui and sense of alienation, by doing anything less than outright grovelling and cringing and apologizing for feeling this ennui in the first place, at a time when being a "default" young-white-working-class-male means being the most atomized and pointless and taken-for-granted drone in an already atomized and pointless society, every single one of these ultra-subtle critical theorists says the same shit: "LOL what are you a fucking virgin? Man up! Buck up! You don't deserve any sympathy! You aren't guaranteed anything! It's YOUR responsibility to EARN the things you want from life! Just because you're miserable, doesn't mean you have the right to lash out, ever!"
It's a one-to-one analogous case, in the abstract. But there's no analogous consideration of structural or systemic factors, no interest in "seeing the perpetrator as himself a victim," no interest in subtly examining how social isolation almost always leads to short-sighted lashing-out that just leads to worse isolation in a vicious cycle, nothing.
DECADES of postmodern wanking about sympathy for the downtrodden hasn't managed to make that sympathy reflexive. It was all one big role-playing game.
Ayden Richardson
TL;DR Jews have double standard because fundamentally they only care about destroying Europeans
Jackson Torres
What are you rambling about?
Angel Morgan
Bump.
Aiden King
Trump: clearly and rationally lays out why the southern border is a disaster and why the wall is the smartest way to fix it
Shumer & Pelosi: RRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!
Luis Ward
fuck off retard, OP's post was an NPC litmus test, if you ask wtf he is rambling about then congratulations: you're an npc
Dylan Johnson
We shouldn't simply follow our gut and say "pull yourself up by your bootstraps! Murder and violence are never justified, and no matter how oppressed you are, you aren't entitled to cruelty, hatred, spite, or resentment!" We should constantly remind ourselves against all our instincts that we're occupying the uphill, superior position, the easier position to hold, and we're shouting down at someone who is barely surviving, using this tragedy to justify keeping the structures of oppression
Why 'We shouldn't?' Why the default assumption that compassion is the way to go. Very serious question.
Second point: if ''we'' --whatever this ''we'' BS may be--, if 'we' are occupying the uphill position, why do we propose that we 'constantly remind ourselves'? What kind of self-flagellating guilt-tripped reality do you want to live in exactly? Also serious question.
Basically, I am asking about the justification to these attitudes you seem to think we should hold, especially when on 'the other side' you have marxist deconstructionists who don't give a fuck.
Jacob Parker
>We shouldn't simply follow our gut and say "pull yourself up by your bootstraps! Murder and violence are never justified, and no matter how oppressed you are, you aren't entitled to cruelty, hatred, spite, or resentment!" We should constantly remind ourselves against all our instincts that we're occupying the uphill, superior position, the easier position to hold, and we're shouting down at someone who is barely surviving, using this tragedy to justify keeping the structures of oppression in place because "it's fundamentally the individual's responsibility and the individual's guilt." See this is where they fucked up. They've locked themselves into a false dichotomy. We can't have a society where everyone is treated fairly if personal responsibility isn't valued. Even if you've faced unfair and extreme odds you have a responsibility to do the right thing. This can be argued at an even more basic level than morality, for it's impossible to correct an unjust society if people unfairly treated by it destabilize it with their actions. It's common sense and it's no surprise that postmodern ideologues can't grasp that.
Daniel Brown
no argentina, he is mocking the thought process of the left tards, the argument is that left tards don't make any sense because we have seen them saying out of one corner of their mouth "that nigger who just raped and killed those people is a good boy he dindu nothing its everyone else's fault, how dare anyone else judge his actions, society owes this nigger reparations, its societies fault society is to blame not the individual" while at the same time saying out of the other corner of their mouth "that white kid is a gay little faggot lmao look at him struggling and shit what a PATHETIC virgin lol society doesn't own you shit why aren't you able to make it on your own, how dare you stand up for yourself you're supposed to patrol your own actions extremely tightly even to the point of dying so at least neurotic banshees don't get triggered, society doesn't exist for you and it doesn't owe you anything its not societies fault its the fault of the individual its your fault"
Jayden Hernandez
Right, but these Rosa Luxembourg types would tell you that what you just wrote about the impossibility of correcting an unjust society is that you talk of 'correcting' as euphemysm for 'reform', and reform is just not possible comrade, nor desirable, we need to ''smash it all to bits'' kind of thing.
Jace Smith
Thank NZ, I actually realized that as I posted my previous reply to ODLvPZ3z, oops! In any case, the Q I pose about compassion has been nagging at me for some time..... Thanks for the explainz....
Robert Walker
And that's when you tell them their ideas are doomed to deliver on their promises and that half assed deconstruction only aides the worst kinds of market economies (0 compassion, all consumption and profit) and worst kinds of bureaucracies, authoritarian and totalitarian states. Turn the dynamic around on them and shame them deeply for unwittingly becoming tools of the things they despise. Be relentless in revealing how they've only stopped short because they are petty people using ideas of a just world as an excuse to fight rather than fighting for the sake of a just world. They are egotistical and pathological people and they need to realize it.
Dylan Morales
It is downright bizarre to witness this happening in real time.
Lucas Evans
>Why 'We shouldn't?' Why the default assumption that compassion is the way to go. Very serious question. You have to search within yourself for the answer to that. In short I'd say that reality is rather absurd and it's obvious that a lot of conflict and suffering arises out of ignorance and confusion. Most squander opportunity and resent those who are successful, leading them and others to ruin. Nature says "let the strong survive" but man can cultivate and tend to things to bring out what is good in them. That doesn't mean you dump energy into lost causes, but it's entirely worthwhile to invest your energy into the betterment of all things around you. This has largely been the goal of saints and sages, who realize that the game of existence takes place in a much grander scale than just right here and now.
Chase Jackson
So Marxian analysis is essentially abstract reasoning for people who do not possess the intellectual capacity to effectively reason.
Jaxon Powell
>What kind of self-flagellating guilt-tripped reality do you want to live in exactly? Also serious question. This kind of behavior see you in neomarxists and postmodernists is just a masochistic form of masturbation for the most part. There is value though in having regret for your own misdeeds. But you don't linger on them or form an identity based on your failings. You express sincere regret, make amends and alter your character so that you don't falter again.
Jaxon Powell
I gave up hope for most people. They are just sheep, the political fads are their moral compass. I knew all of this shit OP. Years ago. Most people don't care about double standards, they care about labels that the jew uses to mark the cattle.
Juan Long
If they are cattle then tend to them like a good shepherd. At least don't allow their ignorance to distract you from bettering yourself.
Matthew Edwards
Is this a blog thread or something?
Grayson Morales
Christ they're not even hiding their reptilian features any more
Justin Walker
Your premise is wrong, so all your saying is useless and deceiving. You're a cheap asshole.
Angel Cook
Right, but I'm sure you know the digusting look in the eyes of these people, when they snap right back with ''well, when WE are in power, WE will make sure things are good and just.'' Difference between this sort of person vs. someone willing to engage in cross-contamination of ideas through discussion etc., is that THEY are the good ones, you me and everyone else are part of the problem, they'll fix us, and they'll fix us good through a good ol' censorious authoritarian bureaucracy. Furthermore, th true pschopath already knows from a very young age what they are. False analogy coming your way, but fuck it: when someone engages in pilpul, they themselves know very well what they are doing, so much so that without that awareness, the 'operationalization' of a pilpul fails.
Charles Anderson
On paper, I agree with every single word you wrote here. On paper, and in theory. Now, in practice, as a dweller in a 3rd world country where you better believe th ride never fucking ends, well.... Lemme quote Max Stirner, currently reading him when I get the time:
(Orig. in German, I am translating from Spanish, fair warning):
To hell with any and all causes that are not completely and exlusively my own cause! My cause, they will say to me, must at least be 'the good cause'. What is good, what is bad?I myself am my own cause, yet I am neither good nor bad;those are but words to me. All that is divine looks towards God, all that is human looks towards Man. My cause is neither divine nor human, nor is it true/the truth, nor goodness, nor justice, nor freedom; my cause is mine own, it is not a generalization, but a unique thing, as I myself am Unique. Nothing is above me....
--Max Stirner, 'Ego and its Own'
William Sanders
Again, agreed, regret is a harsh and truthful teacher.
Benjamin Phillips
No offence but it was never about adressing so called structural inequality but about granting power to a new group and stripping the old group of power
It has been highly successful.
Ethan Sanders
TLDR version Marxism and Post Modernism is and always was just Jewish rationalization for hating goyim
Xavier Long
>See this is where they fucked up. They've locked themselves into a false dichotomy. We can't have a society where everyone is treated fairly if personal responsibility isn't valued.
Youre wholly wrong on this point.
They have decided left to the natural order heirachies self establish in certain ways.
These naturally establishing heirarchies they view as an inimical evil and deconstruct them through manipulation.
Through the use of applied psychology and propaganda this is very doable.
Of course once they have enshrined their new heirarchies they may be suprised to find that it mimics the natural heirachies almost exactly with different personages occuping positions withing the paradigm.
Just spittballing, but it seems the only winning position is to destroy the heirarchies primacy within the social construct and replace it allowing natural heirachies to re-assert themselves to an extent.
Thomas Johnson
>Shumer & Pelosi: when will they leave office? they're disgusting morons
Carter Miller
>violence are never justified, it's justified as response to deadly force
Andrew Martinez
>Through the use of applied psychology and propaganda this is very doable. can't pull this when people aren't all watching the same TV anymore
Andrew Turner
This
Bentley Adams
ODLvPZ3z here again Some of these people you can convince though, but it requires that you sympathize with them to some degree and believe strongly in your convictions. There is real power in words, and when all of your mind is focused on one intention it can cut through pilpul like butter. When people absolutely cannot be reasoned with and are hellbent on gaining power there are only a few conscious choices one can make. Leaving out the possibility that these people actually do good with their power (since that seems unlikely given their ignorance and temperament) I would say you can either fight them, meaning you destroy them with a sense of impartiality because your duty requires it, or you humbly accept the fate you have been granted. These are the most reasonable responses to me. They don't deconstruct hierarchies though. They deconstruct traditional models of living and only slightly alter hierarchies, typically for the worse. They want to deconstruct hierarchies but they've failed at it. I argue that their deconstruction has actually made the bad parts of hierarchies stronger while weakening the good parts. I'm generally a proponent of non violence but I think if you're going to do it, do it as I described above: emotionally impartial with your actions being driven by a sense of duty. If you let yourself get wrapped up in it you're going to create problems for yourself both materially and spiritually.
Isaac Cooper
oh what the fuck, I switched devices and no (you)'s were appearing so I figured my ID changed but I guess not
Owen Wright
>They don't deconstruct hierarchies though. They deconstruct traditional models of living and only slightly alter hierarchies, typically for the worse. They want to deconstruct hierarchies but they've failed at it. I argue that their deconstruction has actually made the bad parts of hierarchies stronger while weakening the good parts.
The history of the world is men extricating themselves from the natural order and imposing upon themselves artificial structure.
This has been a long process beginning with tribes, then law, then civilization, then empire, confederacy, nationalism, then civil society, civil religion and its attendant rule of law, then our modern form.
The haltered march of civilization seems to be ever further removal from the natural order creating systems which are superior to the natural model. Some fail and some thrive but deconstruction of the natural order is the greatness of man.
I guess what you and I are intimating is that the ‘new order’ isnt a step foreward but a step backwards.
And again i think that depends on your perspective and point of view.
I think they have retained the normal heirachy just altered those in power by means of the system. Obviously in many ways this has had radical secondary effects. One of which was cultural marxist individuization or stripping white boys of purpose and disempowering them politically and economically.
Of course in such times it is incumbent to create for oneself new paradigms and systems and privately declare new loyalties to new authorship.
I think in many ways the system now ensconced is noble but flawed for many. I would not trade it for the patriarchy of yesteryear.
Aiden Carter
Could they at least try to look a little less like the aliens in They Live?
I don't know if it's a step backwards but a step towards degeneration. Hierarchies are prone to abuse like anything that grants power, but they seem far more functional when infighting is limited. Right now centrists and business leaders run the game but as time goes on the rise of populism and identity politics is going to cause more division. The problem with the current system is that it breaks down traditional culture and replaces it with consumerism and ideologies that seek to create utopia. I don't think it will work out in the long run, my guess is we are heading into a dark age of sorts.
Zachary Ramirez
Youve been brainwashed by pol for too long. Its blackpilled you and blinded you to the simple truth.
Liam Morgan
what's the simple truth then? make your argument. no points for being vague user
Colton Murphy
Wrong, it has only ramped up, because propaganda is now 'exchanged' by real life actors on social media for example, so as opposed to the 90's and earlier, you now get (((their))) brainwashing from your family member, trusted friend,and sure why not, more trad media like film, tv series, billboards, peoples motherfucking T-shirts, increasingly, etc.
Kayden Barnes
Your last two sentences are terrifying. By the time these actors of society realize that 'maybe after all these hierarchies are kinda natural/expected, etc. etc. they've destroyed everything in their path, set back a nation, th globe, whatever, 70 years or more. I suspect you've thought of this point or similar, just putting it out there for the lurkers.
Samuel Johnson
the thing is TV doesn't matter when people just tune into netflix or something similar instead. people just want to tune out and let something else think for them, this is one of the most base problems with mankind.
Michael Gomez
bullshit radar engaged. Pretty sure the dems made similar statements when they wanted Regan to grant amnesty with the promise of fixing immigration which they (((failed))) to do.
Dominic Garcia
bump
Alexander Parker
a good social criticism on my Jow Forums!?
bravo OP
Jayden Ross
This.
America was once a WASP aristocracy ruling over meds and celts who in turn ruled over niggers and Mexicans. Then jews came along after WW2 and wanted to change that.
So they smashed the entire system, and now you have jews ruling over mutts.
Hunter Garcia
What kind of points do you win on pol? Like what kind of prize does that earn you?
Jose Martinez
Read “the abolition of man” by CS Lewis.
He addresses this very issue.
Ryder Wright
Look, you've already demonstrated that you're capable of articulating your ideas. Either you can articulate what you believe I'm missing, or I'm not going to be able to take your claim seriously at all. You say I'm blackpilled and blinded to the simple truth, how so? I don't know what you mean by simple truth, you haven't explained what you mean.
Secondly I don't think I'm blackpilled. I see signs that the world is degenerating, but I still see hope for it. I also know regardless of what happens worldwide I'm going to have a good time and invest effort into spiritual growth. For me, everything is cyclical including the world of man, and that getting too emotionally invested in how man's world functions is a losing game because at some point it's going to hit a down part of a cycle. That's not blackpilled to me.
Caleb Wood
Can't we do both?
James Howard
No doubt, that's why film and tv series are terrible in this sense, zone out and 'relax' exactly as you said, while someone else thinks for you. The bane of humanity, absolutely.
They’ve been here long before WW2. That just happened to be the point they were able to twist the US’s savior complex into multiculturalism and mass immigration to change the demographics in their favor.
