He's right, you know

He's right, you know...

Attached: orwell.png (657x676, 313K)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orwell's_list
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

He is right, yes. But I fail to see how this is inherently bad?

Of course, the common man has no power except through suffrage, while every intellectual, pseud or not, deep down believes himself to naturally belong in the inner circle.

Intellectuals are always the first up against the wall in a revolution. It's inherently bad at least in that it's self-defeating.

Because you are part of the problem.

damn... good thing I'm not an interlectual

Attached: 92d.jpg (211x239, 5K)

>Intellectuals are always the first up against the wall in a revolution.
Unless you're a jew, that is

Some other intelectuals will be paying the shooters. Ultimately, revolutionary utopianism leads to a war of ideas that uses human lives as ammo.

Sometimes i imagine myself in a dictatorship (doesn't matter which side, i don't have real political convictions) in which i'm the head of the department of Aesthetics. I'll have the final word on fashion (you won't be allowed to wear clothes that don't fit and colors that look weird on you, you won't even be allowed to choose what you want, the state approved professionals will take care of that), architecture, city planning, houses, buildings, streets, behaviors (being drunk, talking loud, trying hard to be funny, being awkward etc etc will be punished), porn (porn run by low iq retards isn't aesthetic, only porn made into a frame of art will be allowed, like for example, a Ulysses film in which it shows Molly Bloom getting dicked, in a stream of conciousness point of view), culture, video games, basically, all spheres of life. I think anyone who's an artist wants his artistic vision to be imposed in the world. If not then you're simply a pseud.

I have similar thoughts but I wouldn't want to impose by preferences in all facets of aesthetics. Mainly what I would like to control is city-planning and architectural design, maybe also fashion a bit (I really dislike modern fashion, even clothes I personally wear). Just imagine man

Attached: athensuni.jpg (1300x992, 183K)

Thank goodness there is no inherent value to human life and the plebs exist to die in my service. God bless the meat grinder of war.

Attached: de maistre.png (800x500, 436K)

Nah
The rise of social media has shown most people are fine with authoritarianism, so long as they are on the winning side. Democracy is more of a Nash equilibrium rather than something most people earnestly believe in

In what way is that self-defeating? You’re trying to apply a stricly logical relationship to a context-relative problem. Intellectuals critique the existing state insofar as it is advantageous to do so by any means necessary. Of course this has the aim of subverting power. No one is ever not trying to dominate you in some form, that’s why “fascism” is such an empty yet politically useful term.

you sound like a pseud hardcore

yup, no one ever pogrom'd the jews

because everyone believes in 'our' side. If you don't understand what's wrong with that you're part of the problem.

So we will have a competition over who gets to rule. Competition is healthy, sir

I daydream about being Prime Minister and

>imposing even more punitive terms on student loans
>scrapping the Equality and Human Rights Commission; Arts Council England; all equality departments
>automatically ejecting anyone from council housing if they or their kids are convicted of violent crimes
>putting the BBC license fee down 20 %

and so on

I think that could be because of American propaganda. Bunch of cucks.

From my observations, this seems to be true. People who become heavily invested in politics and economics tend to desire a more hands-on approach to both.

Ah, i'm something of a plato reader myself

This guy avoided combat all his life, lmao.

intellectuals are failed mystics too weak for death

He literally covertly reported people he thougth dangerous to state security agencies instead of, you know, going through open channels like a good little "anti-totalitarian" should.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orwell's_list

Attached: uugh.png (500x700, 417K)

I know nothing about De Maistre, is he actually advocating all-encompassing violence with this quote or is he just describing the state of things?

For sure. Nobody genuinely believes that they are morally obliged to follow the law because of the social contract. Everyone believes it is their perogative to enforce their ideals on the world.

state of things fren

I ask because I've seen multiple people post this image as if it's an endorsement for their sociopathy

Shut up faggot, how’s fashion school?

competition is healthy when it involves co-operation, which is the opposite of what Orwell is describing.

well, cant help that
there being no god, we can either treat each other like shit or build the best world we can . I know what I vote for.

Explain leftists then? The s o y cucks feminists and mindless regurgitators screaming in the streets everytime Trump tweets? They're intellectual?

What part of the quote do you feel would suggest that?

explain gen y and how 90% of them seemed to turn out like that regardless of intellect

Why?

>Humans are animals? Well then how come horses aren't human even though they're animals too?
What you're doing is called affirming the consequent, and you'd benefit yourself by understanding that.

Who says ideologues cannot cooperate? And why is competition only healthy when cooperating? Look at any single player sport like Tennis or Sprint

Reporting communists to the authorities is one of my hobbies.

You got my vote, let me know when you run

heh