Why aren't right wingers as well read as leftists?

You have to analyze what you read instead of just reading. Also, personal experience and observarion can say more than some dead person centuries ago who never lived your life not that I am suggesting to ignore anything written a long time ago.

Also, reading encyclopedia articles and reading about current events can keep you more informed about certain matters than reading the works of a lying tyrant such as Julius Caesar or reading the works of an old world version of a trust fund baby such as Voltaire.

By the way, this image fits in so well.

Attached: Screenshot_20180916-190933_Gallery.jpg (1079x808, 262K)

Just shut the fuck up.

Because fascism is fundamentally anti-intellectual, and it grows at the expense of introspection.

Because right wing politics is just intuitive, it comes naturally so you don't have to justify it. Lefties are retards and try to justify their stupid beliefs through literature and philosophy. That only leads to discourse, which is why the left is so fragmented.

Because the left/liberals have won, they control the intellectual institutions, therefore any person who is well read will, by necessity be more exposed to leftist/liberal literature.

Basically the only opposition leftists/liberals have are a few biblethumpers and the white proletariat.

As opposed to leftism, which is only introspection without external verification.

It's funny that out of all of those, even Socrates, Nietzsche is still the purest b8

it ain't bait
Socrates democratized philosophy, and brought it away from the aristocratic pre-Socratics to the people in the street. that's a very liberal concept.

Nietzsche is a bit of a stretch, but hear me out: his philosophy is very individualist and anti-collectivist. He inspired many future thinkers to reject socialist theory, such as Rand and Foucault. He might not be a 'liberal', but he definitely belongs to the tradition.

youtu.be/n2VfL6M_Vyc

Ummm sorry sweatie

This vid youtube.com/watch?v=qoXezg6i4y4 is much better

He reks adorno and cuckphilosophy in one video

Because the right-wing analysis and interpretation of reality is based much more on observation of current trends, events and popular culture instead of being based in some abstract, platonic pseudo-intellectualism.
The right wing is the new voice of the common working man.

I love having the freedom to destroy the planet, thank you liberalism :)

Attached: 1.jpg (2000x830, 1M)

Why can’t the left btfo the right?

because the right is too retarded to realise when they're making themselves look like complete clowns

Let me solve the eternal right vs left problem:

-Before Modernism: The Left is about plebs trying to team up against the Right (rich/powerful) to gain very basic things like food and some rights, the Right were greatness idealists wanting to impress their grand power vision on everyone else through violence.

-After Modernism: Left is about rich/powerful idealists trying to impress their vision of egalitarianism on the Right (poor/working class/plebs).

Essentially leftism was always about egalitarianism/fairness/empathy and the right was always about greatness/status/pride/power.

It's just the power roles are reversed, the leftists are the aristocrats now and you can see everything they do is to bring about utopia where everyone is happy, the right could never give two shits about this, the righties even when caring for their fellow people it's only when they are also part of their special group (race/country/etc) which supposedly gives them an intrinsic superiority over those who aren't in those groups.

I'm sorry but the leftists were always the good guys, no matter how they fuck up, their goal is egalitarian, the right is fundamentally about status projection, power and ego.

>muh empathy
>muh egalitarianism

you fuckers never fail to make me laugh

Attached: 1505530787343.jpg (632x548, 43K)

they aren't?

>fuck empathy and egalitarianism
yikes desu

grug empathy bad, muh dick good
kys

It's not actually egalitarianism though. It's anyone who they deem as acceptable to induce as a part of their tribe. That's why leftism is dangerous: it doesn't respect differences. If you're a divergent person, then they *will* cast you out of the society and turn essentially everyone else against you, and that's why they're so powerful and the dominant ideology atm.

But they don't cast out people arbitrarily like the right does.
There is a reason why they are obsessed with oppressor-oppressed binary, it's because the oppressor can't be egalitarian by definition.

Sure they do their mental gymnastics and end up with some random whitey being the devil and shit, still, compared to righties who just kill/discriminate/shit on whoever JUST because they're different/outsiders.

>-Before Modernism
No, that’s what it is after modernism too. Another facet is the rights reverence for all things past at the experience of the future, while the left looks forward to improving the future.
>The leftists are the aristocrats now
Left-liberals may see themselves as both, but they’re assholes. Not centrist. Not anywhere near left. They’re liars.

He’s a rightwinger like you

*expense
Is what I wrote, not experience

so... no difference? so, leftism is just a flawed project from the inception?

>no difference
EPIC CENTRIST MOMENT!!

>abduct someone
>keep them on your basement
>police finds out and puts you in jail
you: how hypocritical, they both lock someone in a room...heh I'm intelligent.

Go watch more sargon boi.

i understand that it's about the extent and scale of oppression. the problem is that leftism is scaling up the oppression atm... it's a signal that the current leftist paradigm is failed one.

how are they scaling up oppression?

triggered leftist detected

10 people in UK is being jailed for their comments on internet. the liberals are actually being afraid that their freedom of speech is being stripped.

i admit that this isn't as bad as killing or whatever. but, this is just the beginning, and it would be better if we put a stop to this before it gets worse.

>drops in lap

Attached: E209FAE5-F840-434A-B554-116060982623.jpg (614x768, 119K)

10 people in UK are jailed EVERYDAY*

>triggered leftist detected
amazin 2016 meme spouting proud magapede ebin scrt clvb Sh1tl0rd3

FACTS DON'T CARE ABOUT MY FEELINGS HEHEH ;))

lel stay mad

>MUH FREEZE PEACH
hate speech is not free speech, bro. if the things you say are offensive to someone else, you're a threat to our democracy^TM and removing you is the only democratic thing to do.

we are being intolerant towards everyone between centrist and far right... i get the idea of being intolerant towards the absolute intolerance, but this isn't what is happening atm.

>anyone who isn't a leftist is an intolerant fascist by default
epic kid epic

>"i hate eggs."
>off to the gulag!
geez thanks leftists.

lemayo I'm stayn mayd trolfmao after the barrage of based and redpilled arguments you provided I have no choice but to stay eternally buttmad and trolled.com

But what do you define as being non-tolerant?

>they're making themselves look like complete clowns
I thought that Clown World was this years meme?

Essentially this I'm all for leftism and shit but clearly the far lefties are high on their own supply, too much overcorrection, way too much and it's escalating.

Being on the ethical side of the fence doesn't stop you from being a complete fucking retard, and they clearly are being complete fucking retards.
Sry but this is one of the few times we unironically need the milk toast centrists to do something.

>it's a chapocel thread

Attached: qc2km56hi7y21.jpg (1366x768, 149K)

Maybe the tolerant shouldn’t be such weak willed pussies who succumb to the superior fascist ideology.

>if the things you say are offensive to someone else, you're a threat to our democracy^TM
Please be bait

>being an r/drama poster on 4chin

takes one to know one, fellow redditcel

The Chapo guys don't read

I don't understand your leddit references, fuck out of my skrt clvb

It never even began for redditcels

make me 4chincel

What the left calls empathy amounts to little more than ideological projection.

>Butterdyke is a Libertarian now
Impressively contrarian

Ummmm sweetie. Have some fucking sex

in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king

Jesus Christ can’t you just shut your retarded trap for two fucking seconds
Stupid cunt, try actually reading

Both fascism and leftism are caused by a lack of introspection. Only the most intelligent and honest minds can realize the truth of NRX and it's joys like Patchwork, G/ACC, and elective technocratic monarchism

Attached: 1560712279129.jpg (500x508, 27K)

This crap again. Are there no jannies? Sage. In every field.

Attached: 1559272456540.jpg (596x415, 39K)

Kill yourself, tranny

Leftists are just as intolerant as literal Nazis. The Nazis couldn't destroy France for example no matter how hard they tried, fifty years of open borders, and France won't exist in 2100. I'm sure they would much rather live under the Nazis and Petain than having their entire ethnicity and way of life wiped out by global capital.

Attached: 1558066158804.png (572x392, 37K)

This is bait.

>this again

Attached: backfire.jpg (800x955, 297K)

I'm not a trannie.

Attached: C-658VsXoAo3ovC.jpg (800x450, 46K)

The Left/Right dichotomy is just divisive and leads to slave morality.

How does this not apply? SJW's have never supported ISIS

Fascism is Third Pos, neither Left nor Right.
Also, sage in every field.

Attached: 1544287710831.gif (817x537, 2.23M)

>muh slave moralité
>muh false dichotomy
Then what do you propose Instead of left and right

Based

>SJW's have never supported ISIS
They do, however, support Muslim mass immigration into the western world which breeds domestic terrorism

Brainlet

Even bigger brainlet

Sure, buddy, whatever...

Attached: Its_All_So_Tiresome.png (1022x731, 643K)

>believing this meme

Peak boomer

not an argument

Third Position.

Attached: 3dway.png (518x1274, 754K)

Dilate. You're probably a fucking zionist roastie.

Where's that graphic from user?

Here here.

Not me

Schizophrenic or bait?

>thinking this refutes. Again.

Wasn’t calling anyone a fascist, i don’t know who the hell any of you are, but you all know there are fascists and similar bootlicking morons on this site. I was just throwing the grenade in the thread to trigger said morons.

Fauxfly, get a name already.

They support post colonial ideology which inevitably brings support to radical Islam.

ad hominem

There is no third position. It's just an authoritarian government with Keynesian economics.

Attached: 1561302732535.png (886x886, 41K)

>Third position
>Authoritarian capitalism!!!
No, thanks, but no.

You're a retard. Butterfly. You think the USSR and Fascism are free market capitalist.

The first principle of creation is judgement, its analogue is hierarchy.

Either you believe that inequality is a moral good, or you are positing implicitly yet absolutely that our existence is a mistake.

No, never said any such thing. They’re types of state centralized capitalism, and perversions of the term socialism. Half measures at best, economically. Not a fan of either obviously

Bruh the US is literally overflowing with domestic terrorists already. You just don't pay attention to them because they're white supremacists and you implicitly endorse their messaging.

Look up the actual numbers. White supremacists barely commit terrorist acts compared to Islamic terrorists.

>the US is overflowing with domestic terrorists
>therefore we should have Muslim mass migration to make them even angrier

see

>actual numbers
>infowars.co.nz

Accident, natural happenstance, not mistake.

Bears repeating

Attached: 84B84526-E455-44DA-A01A-E56499B45E22.jpg (999x664, 199K)

Also, not everyone here is from the US, Amerimutt

Hey OP, you could have had the exact same thread on /pol/ but you decided to shit up this board with it
Thanks, well done

>White supremacists barely commit terrorist acts in Syria, compared to Islamic terrorists

Lefties and pseudoleft are only about letting refugees in. The CIA however have made promises to their proxy troops in ISIS
So again, the problem is statism and capitalism

You clearly haven't read Marx. He wasn't a leftist.

>Marx wasn't a leftist.
When will this meme die?

yet, Yea Forums clearly wants to discuss about the political philosophy. deal with it.

He could at least try reading a fucking book on the topic

>implying anything in this thread can be called political philosophy

The fact is conservatives are less intelligent.
Progressiveness is the path towards new ideas, openness, and understanding that is absent in traditional values.

Simp

>look up the actual numbers that I can't find or cite because I'm clearly bullshitting and don't want to get called out on it

No, it's that our Justice Department doesn't use the term "domestic terrorist" if the suspect passes the paper bag test. If you're white enough, you're a "lone wolf" or part of a "mililtia."

>implying cuckservatives are representative of all right-wingers
Also, the fact that many colleges and universities intentionally and systematically indoctrinate their students into the neo-progressive left massively distorts that statistic.

>Imagine actually believing this
The FBI proportionally infiltrates radical groups of any persuasion. If anything, they've left leftist and black nationalist groups off the hook

So you know the numbers, and you're one who's bullshitting. Go on and cite the "real" numbers under your definitions.

>Muslims are terrorists
imagine being this fucking stupid.

Christians are much more likely to be domestic terrorists, ever heard of Oklahoma City, if you were actually concerned with terrorists you'd be pissing your pants when you realize how dangerous the Christians are. You're so fucking ignorant.

Have you, like, never read a single book on the history of the FBI?

No, I want to know what your "actual numbers" are first. The burden of proof and so forth.

Have sex

good thing I'm a psychological egoist so I can exploit gay retards like >you

Attached: z8tvjn2tale21.jpg (733x751, 35K)

>this "paradox" that is simply nothing more than a self-refutation that normies love to repost on social media
>making "tolerance" (the inability to either accept or reject something) as some virtue that one should try to achive.
>karl popper
Its laughable how hard these people exercise their spooked brains just to hold some shitty virtue title instead of being honest and saying that they dont accept X, but accept Y.
That image is the pure example of your brain on spooks, thinking that tolerance is something with a higher essence than the individual.

Attached: IMG_20190323_032013.jpg (500x377, 39K)

>parodox aint reel!!

Found the fashy

Attached: 8672B660-1F24-43AE-97B5-8634D146FC0D.jpg (1200x650, 165K)

ourworldindata.org/terrorism
Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria have most terrorism in the world. If you look at it from global perspective, islamic terrorists do most of terrorism against multiple countries such as India, Egypt, Turkey, and so on.

I've yet to meet a well read tankie IRL, not even academics.

>you'd be pissing your pants when you realize how dangerous the Christians are
They also make up a far greater percentage of the western population than mudslimes do, it is to be expected that there would be more terrorist attacks by Christians, dumbass
This proves nothing

I'm astonishingly sure I was talking about DOMESTIC terrorism, but thanks for playing

if you actually believe the Germans were truly ideologically on board with Hitler's plan and that it wasn't just the fact that he singlehandedly dragged them out of an undeserved depression then you're brainwashed by Jews

>he can't into population sizes
Holy shit you're a retard.

Attached: 1561305012309.jpg (644x800, 71K)

Yeah because most well-read people are center-left or center-right.

Attached: IMG_20190623_120249.jpg (640x928, 82K)

>if you were actually concerned with terrorists you'd be pissing your pants when you realize how dangerous the Christians are.
They pose no danger to me or things I care about. "Terrorism" is the cry of those who want to defend the status quo in some way or another, in actuality it means very little.

>undeserved depression
Who’s the capitalist here?

Attached: 2ED3A338-B544-4328-A7E1-F4F163E15762.png (1200x1555, 84K)

ITT: White college students who bought into their "cultural sensitivity" classes

Attached: comeonnow.png (1228x1150, 174K)

>being tolerant (in this context): not censoring any the ideas of others.
>being untolerant: censoring some or all the ideas of others
>me tolerant
>me see idea i dont like cuz it can kill me
>me censor and refuse that idea
>me can no longer be considered tolerant
Wow, what a great paradox this is.

Attached: 1500419526770.gif (300x225, 1.99M)

Right wing books are constantly being banned. Tells you how subversive and rebellious left wing ideas are.

But what is defined as "intolerance"? That is the issue. As of late, the worst people, in both left and right circles, seem to think that it's people who disagree with them. No one's going to defend neo-nazis (aside from the usual suspects), it's just are people actually dealing with "the bad guys" or just advancing their own political agenda with the illusion that they're being just?

"btw we define intolerance by our own completely subjective criteria"

This desu

Attached: ga77aiz80os01.jpg (520x543, 53K)

In germany they are or at least the new right, not the NatSoc retards of course.

Attached: Chesterton - Demut.jpg (1200x713, 108K)

Name ONE thing that has been censored by the left.

>No one's going to defend neo-nazis (aside from the usual suspects)
Another problem is that the left tends to call anyone who wants to restrict immigration and strengthen national identity a neo-nazi

Language

>The new right
Yuck.

>Culture of Critique
>Mein Kampf
>The Bible
>Julius Evola
>Oswald Spengler
>Oswald Mosley's books
I could go on and on
>Inb4 they deserved it or it wasn't true censorship, if you reply with those I will track you down and make you eat your own shit

The many people who have lost their jobs because of something they said long ago (usually jokes). I think of Count Dankula, who taught his pug to do a nazi salute as a joke to mess with his girlfiriend because she would gush over it so much and even says so in the original video. Now he's basically living off of patron bux and though he has more exposure, he's still in a very uncertain place, all because of a joke.

Food

Attached: 1544110500175.png (876x960, 292K)

Tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society.

I oppose censorship in the capacity of it being a institutionalized and normalized thing. I fear it becoming a weapon of politics instead of its apparent function as "protecting the children/minorites", all while touting it as just and fair. It works for you until it doesn't. Left wing boomers won't complain until it turns on them and by then it'll be too late.

Based user, die neue Rechte is fucking awesome

They support Islam and make excuses for it.

Better futures, rewards won only from risk, candor, honesty, clarity, trust, kinship, faith in strangers, virtues born only by struggle, all notions of improvement, the ability of any person to change their own life, privacy, the soul, the sanctity of anything, the sacred, the idea that there could be anything good that was not also profane, love for people near and distant, that imperfect projects shouldn't be scuttled outright on the merest emotional basis, that impelling truths exist, contradictions, mysteries, confounding variables, danger, all psychic phenomena that might unbind the person from risk averse elders, that ruin is natural and predictable and inevitable, that bad things happen independent of their political expediency, that raising children is more important than any other human endeavor, that the human being is not fully formed until they procreate, that reproduction is as close to miracles as most of us will reach, that the poor are only ever exploited by power and only ever accidentally improve their lot, that betrayal, censorship and poisonous propaganda are not inherently destructive and disqualifying to all who seek advantage through their evil, that evil exists, that the human is credible to create the notation of "evil," that no person can reach a state free from evil, that hedonism and consumerism are mundane facets of managing the modern human, that humans cannot be controlled, that humans are more wily than models and simulations, that castes exist, that there's a unified political class dictating the destinies of millions completely disguised behind the pageantry of leftists, leftoids, The Left, the progressives, change agents, fact checkers, navigators, activists, hacktivists, intersectional ninjas and whichever xirple I'm forgetting.

Are you fishing for pity?

You can't post FBI crime statistics on twitter without losing your account.

butterfag absolutely destroyed

fascism is an image based movement.
Marxism was a text based movement

>Socrates was right-wing

Fucking anachronic stupid bullshit. I bet you're an American.

>right wing equals fascism
Really makes you think

>USSR banned food

This is your brain on fascism.

>Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ

I don't know, Socrates. The German depression post WWII was brought about by moralizing states making some sort of statement when in reality they were just fucking assholes (i.e. Europeans). Hitler took that idea of a strong state and just did it better because Germans aren't a bunch of schizo faggots like the French or self-loathing ironists like the English.

>doesn't even get this obvious meme
This is your brain on marxism.

Not really, he won't ever leave.

I know but we can bully him at least

It makes no difference. It's what he wants. Tripfags are tumors which have no chemotherapy available.

that is not what Popper said, that's Marcuse posturing as Popper

Sorry but I can't watch videos with jumpcuts

Will you... Please smell my finger?

Mill was a socialist.

I'd say it's more to do with the close-minded nature of being right-wing that's deeply embedded in their fundamental beliefs. The right are generally concerned with borders and boxes and "putting things in their place" and leaving them the hell alone. Once something is set they don't want it fucked with. A trait that has its qualities. Thus, they don't want their beliefs challenged. The left (not leftist extremism mind you) is generally more open. This would lead them to not only wanting their beliefs/world view challenged but actually seeking out and inviting it. If someone on the right were to read, I would assume it would be for the purpose of reinforcing their opinions/views/belief. Example: religious fundamentalists that never read anything other than the Bible and the Left Behind series.

This breaks down completely when it comes to things like race differences. The left are completely dogmatic, won't even listen to evidence or reason on that subject. Most of them are similarly deranged about sex differences

>me unknow parodox
Proving something to the op right there.

>mien kamf isn’t available to me ... if i livd in germany.... except by special currier

Where would one draw the line? I donno, say, when the one group wants the other dead or forced into poverty? Sound alright?
Planet of the Apes.jpg

All available. For free even. In stores in the US.

One should not take being bludgeoned to death. But should one take offense that someone is having sex with someone you do not approve of?

Except no.
Not even me anyway.

WWI happened for the sake of money. Germany lost and was stuck with the bill. Hitler used Jews as a scapegoat even though it was every banker and wealthy shit who made money off their defeat.
Too bad the socialists didn’t win.

Okay. I don’t care

Because mainstream literature has to be acceptable to the powers that be, and right wingers are the rebels of modern society.

What does it even mean to be well-read and why does it matter?

Leftists don't read historical or good literature lmao. They read Saul Alinsky and terrorist's memoirs.

well leftism is speculative, and thus requires one to inquire in order to be speculative. rightism(which to me includes liberalism) is traditional, even fascism is some sort of futuristic tradionalism.
so the right thinks they have always had the answer the left thinks they have found the answer. this is why pragmatism is radical centrist/converative-progressivism/anarcho-moderate. Peirce knew. radical centrists are simutaniously the best read, most sentimental, most ethical, and undieingly radical people in politics

What about the science of race and iq?

im not familiar with it. racism is definitely not okay and it is unacceptable to use science to justify racist policies.
it may well be that there is differences in race and iq, although that says nothing about that being a determining factor in society, and i doubt it is very significant anyways.
i think all living things should be loved and treated as neighbors, and you should put the community first. My iq is significantly higher than the vast majority of all people and im still a big retard. Iq doesn't mean anything.

Ah well basically different races have different average iqs, and iq is also pretty significant at least for judging the success of a country, though it should be obvious iq came first.

>My iq is significantly higher than the vast majority of all people and im still a big retard. Iq doesn't mean anything.
That’s because 99% of people are retards though. We literally can’t handle getting stupider, the 1/400 people who are actually capable of anything are being stressed.

>racism is definitely not okay and it is unacceptable to use science to justify racist policies.

Attached: 1553567488186.jpg (1080x1012, 123K)

Because right wingers are working actual jobs and contributing to society in a meaningful way.

>and iq is also pretty significant at least for judging the success of a country
citation needed
, though it should be obvious iq came first.

doubtful.

anyways "succesful countries" you speak of are basically atrocity mills and are evil as far as im concerned. as a high iq person from a successful country i absolutley resent mouthbreathing chuavanists using smart people like me to justify their despicable beliefs. Chauvinism is juvenile. being better at something doesnt make you a superior person/group

I'll agree with you that there are a bunch of hacks on the right-wing, just as there are on the left. In looking for the more nuanced writing on the right, I think there is a good amount of skepticism to top-down thinking/planning and Chesterton's Fence like stuff.

These would never be labeled right wing, but they are conservative. I would say that Jane Jacobs, Jonathon Haidt, and to some extend Paul Theroux promote some conservative values. Jacobs distrusted the technocratic modern planning, in favor of local organic development. Haidt says maybe there are some moral foundations besides harm/care that are important to a well functioning society. Theroux, at least in Dark Star Safari, is dropping truth bombs like only some sixty year old who has seen it all could get away with (I highly recommend). Also, economic literature has a light of right-learning heavyweights (Misses, Hayek).

So basically, I would say--for left and right, stay away from the hacks and critique the best arguments from the other side.

Any sort of religious fundamentalism isn't right wing. They are just resentful leftists

>citation needed
Garrett Jones "Hive Mind"

Not the person you are replying to, but I don't think anyone is talking about superiority. Intelligence is highly heritable and you are insufferable if you claim superiority over something you have no control over. People are/were shaped by their environments. It is however, disingenuous to ignore/subvert the science. There is variation amongst groups and between groups. That is nature...it would be weird if there was not.

Also, "successful countries" often have high standards of living, low infant mortality, social safety nets, etc. There is some social anomie we are seeing, but better that people, in general, are being fed.

for once please think about what the words you type mean, not just what the words sound like.

Low iq

butterbitch plz shut the fuck up and never come back to Yea Forums every time you post the board gets a little closer to dying

okay, my issue is this is clearly being mentioned in a political context, which heavily implies chauvinism or bureaucratic racism.
also its disingenuous to attribute success to iq in successful countries, that are defined as successful based on " high standards of living, low infant mortality, social safety nets, etc." when geopolitics, economic and political power, global trade and historical factors are key determinates. Is china really successful, they wouldn't be so successful without resources from "unsuccessful" countries, likewise the USA and western Europe would not have what they have without their dominant power in global trade and geopolitics throughout modern history?
attributing this to success to iq doesn't make any sense with these very significant extraneous factors.

anyways like i said, the average IQ of a group of people is irrelevant when it comes to political deliberation. It only seems to me to be a facetious misappropriation of science to justify racist politics.
and im not even calling into question that average iq varies among separate populations of people, just that this is politically irrelevant if you aren't an authoritarian or supremacist.

i do have some doubts about the science and the relative importance of iq, but that's not relevant. i readily accept that some populations of people are smarter than others and that probably has some genetic basis

Maybe they are but just don't show it off as much?

>socrates
>nietzsche
>liberal

Attached: fuckyou.gif (424x256, 989K)

didn't R.Cam debate the dude in the middle on twitter and it wasn't even a contest who was more well-read (Cam)?

>Any movement that preaches intolerance must be outside the law

By that argument you deserve to be censored as well for advocating for that solution. Retard. It's called a paradox for a reason.

Neither are me.

It was bait

Attached: Barry nice bait.jpg (625x626, 64K)

In my experience most right-wing literature tends to either lean towards prose or become prose, it becomes more about telling a good story then trying to objectively define the world. This is the biggest difference between the right and left: the former is made up of poets and writers, the latter is made up of statisticians and economists.

This can be most effectively seen in the gun control debate, where absolutely no leftist arguements are ever entertained because blaming the system that creates violence in general prevents the necessary in-group identification needed for both sides of the debate. Specifically, when the debate focuses around guns it gives rightwing writers in the Dem and Republican parties an easy way to define two groups (gun and non-gun) from which a narrative can be built from. But if the argument were to be recast as say pro-healthcare or anti-healthcare (or welfare or social security in general), the two sides can't be easily divided as most people want healthcare and thus it becomes a spectrum instead of a staged debate. The same shit plays out over abortion, those against it don't want to enter a debate about womens' welfare and those for it don't want to enter a debate about labor conditions.

It can also be seen with the climate change debate: the most "green" types tend to be strongly anti-nuclear for no reason other than it's a good story to be against it. The big bad nuclear power plant company that makes nuclear weapons and poisoned people was stopped before they could kill lesser dangers like oil or coal. This argument of course falls flat upon any introspection or scientific, objective study but that's not the point. It's a good story.

Overall society has become more reactionary, especially with the spread of literal reaction videos online. The rise of right-wing politics is inevitable in this regard, in the same way the rise of left-wing politics was inevitable with the rise of print newspapers and cheap paperback books.

Liberals make more money and are willing to ignore certain things to promote their values. For example see any liberal that supports solar panel subsidization but doesn't want to take imported co2 emissions into account when lifetime emissions are calculated. It's about selling a product, not trying to understand human society. This is what separates liberals from the left.

>that's a very liberal concept.
imagine thinking this. why do you think trots have a reputation for selling newspapers

Attached: 41hwmHbbwjL.jpg (334x500, 21K)

Historical records tend to omit radical leftist thinkers or the people just assassinate them. Liberals are right wingers after all.

Leftists are fragmented because their brains aren't wired to groupthink. Organized religions predominantly exist in right wing spheres of influence in contrast to the left which has tried to abolish them.

Goldman, Debs, Dubois, and Sinclair were all featured in my high school history class.

Nigga, they teach a People's History of the United States in high school history class now. Leftist ideals are the absolute mainstream these days. You people won, you should be happy with this wonderful world you've made for yourselves

>they teach a People's History of the United States in high school history class now.

No they don't, I would know since I'm a high school history teacher in one of the most liberal parts of California. Even here the remaining bit of required U.S History is just a semester split between the Revolution and the Civil War, the other half of the year is for a week of sex ed then study hall (most Sophmohres choose to go home early though). This is all borne from budget cuts and the emphasis on STEM and getting students into the college pipeline, since history is seen as a dead end.

I'll grant that APUSH has been pozzed by questionable and racial-themed essay prompts, but the more I live the more I realize the College Board is a racket in the first place.

>Leftist ideals are the absolute mainstream these days.

Our superintendent literally threatened to fire anyone who tried to join a Union, which he had to walk back due to the ongoing strikes across the rest of the state. Meanwhile the state continues to phase out teachers entirely for flipped/hybrid classrooms where students do most of the work on a computer, despite opposition from parents, students and teachers.

Racial reactionism is mainstream, but not actual left ideas. Complaining about racism gets an official written response from the school board, but complaining about student:teacher ratios or the lack of adjunct pay gets nothing. This problem also exists in the UC system as you can imagine.

Some kids are spoon fed Ayn Rand and George Washington. What wonderful school district allowed actual leftism be known to their kids, user?

Butterfly, please tell me you don't allow yourself to be sucked into this braindead 'right vs. left' dichotomy. I am literally no longer interested in someone who would be this stupid :3

I've known women who impartially consider literature. If you really expect me to believe there are 'right' and 'left' kinds of people I will no longer be interested in you.

Yes, to the person claiming Howard Zinn isn't taught, Howard Zinn is indeed in the high school curriculum of many districts.

Sigh. :3

You're full of shit I live in Berkeley and almost all of my teachers have been old white boomers. The only leftist thinker any of them ever mentioned was Malcom X and that teacher was black.

FALSE DICHOTOMY XDD
Yeah I too believed that when I was 15yo.
It's baby's first political "wokeness".

Give it a few years and you'll come around.

I unironically cringe and cannot take seriously when someone drops the edgy plebshit tier "false dichotomy" meme.

kys brainlet

To be fair, you should read around. Why would you only want to confirm your biases? I just got through reading an Austrian socialist and bought a book by a Chicago school economist today. I also xtensively read a completely scientific work on the art of collecting information (statistics) within economics and the social sciences.

All three are works on economics, only two have inherent biases, I would prefer to read all three. :3

>In my experience most right-wing literature tends to either lean towards prose or become prose
Lmao it's the other way around.
Leftist theory is mostly aesthetic philosophy, rightist theory is mostly numbers and systems.

It is the ONLY viewpoint to have.

I cannot take anyone seriously who is too 'passionate' about something. This is a big problem in intellectual climates. Thinkers like Karl Marx who build their intellectual system of terminology and ideology around an inherent 'problem' with the system are not only being anti-intellectual, they are invalidating the nature of 'science' for what it really is.

The issue with society isn't that they don't want to think. It's that they don't want to think hard and long about things impartially. :3

Also, if ANY of you take either this post () or the biased one he is responding to seriously, you DESERVE to be shot.

The essence of politics these days is essentially deterministic money anyway, we have been in need of a new party for quite some time, something that stands for actual representation.

Barring this, the best option is simply to take a stance AGAINST the two parties. This is not a losing option, as you could see the largest amount of voters voting for a third-party candidate in the most recent election TO DATE. :3

Being absorbed in money games feels absolutely life-draining, and quite simply there is a reason for it. You don't need a violent revolution, you need a revolution against violence.

this
That fucking dude just looks at Hitler and Evola or some shit and thinks that's all of the right lmao.

Rightie politics is far more autistic and analytic than leftie.
Selective attention of the lefties is what created this idea that the right is only about rhetoric and imagery.

You guys have it all mixed up. It's not left vs right. It's up vs. down. I'm an Uppist myself.

>Leftist theory is mostly aesthetic philosophy, rightist theory is mostly numbers and systems.

Cite an example. The most important leftist work of the 19th century, Das Kapital, is essentially an economics textbook describing how monopolies form. Meanwhile the most important right-wing worth of the 20th century, Mien Kampf, is an autobiography.

>Rightie politics is far more autistic and analytic than leftie.

Give an example then. Three people in my family are Klan members, I'm from that part of the country and I know their literature. Most of it is bereft if any sort of numbers or attempts at objective analysis, it's just whining about "justice" and "natural order of races" etc. I'll admit that many leftists are prone to this sort of thinking too, but those people are also low IQ cretins who think anarchism is about burning trash cans.

Chapo trap house define their masculinity in how smart people perceive them to be. They’re seriously just a bunch of ass hole pseuds and Matt Christman is a fucking retard pretending to be angrier than everyone else because he thinks that makes him look “passionate.” Felix is a narcissist. Will is cool and smart but still fuck chapo.