I am Andrew Ryan, and I'm here to ask you a question. What causes all the problems "Whites," says the SJW...

I am Andrew Ryan, and I'm here to ask you a question. What causes all the problems "Whites," says the SJW, "they’re explotative." "Jews," says the alt-right, "they’re subversive." "The government" says the libertarian, "they’re thieves." I rejected those answers; instead, I chose something different. I chose the impossible. I chose people. People are the problem. With time you will despise people too.

Attached: 5DFB0A36-E840-4F6C-9C88-DCAA585CAF53.png (485x905, 594K)

He was based.
The only thing he did wrong was lose.

Based and redpilled

Based and Anti-natalistpilled.

Extremely based

I unironically am both humanist and anti-humanist simply because I recognize the potential of mankind for greatness but am painfully aware of the sheer number of defects we have that ultimately greatly outnumber the amount of positives.

Andrew Ryan was fucking amazing.

For every 5th Symphony, a genocide. For every Sistine Chapel, a deliberately manufactured famine. For every Eiffel Tower, a dozen wars. There's capacity for good, sure but for the most part humans are monsters.

Attached: 1461947495372.gif (486x289, 1.08M)

Damn. I still remember when i was 13

That's the point I made.
We have potential for absolute greatness but we have already mastered absolute atrocities.

Emanuel Kant is the problem.

Bet you didn’t know Armin Shimerman voiced this guy (a jew)

Sure did a good job

He really did. Was also Quark from Star Trek if I remember correctly

Kant assumed humans were rational which is a massive fallacy

It's not that he assumed it, it's that he hoped for it.

As long as we're bio-chemical reaction based we will never be truly rational no matter how hard we try.
Hormones don't help the situation either.

what you call good and evil are simply anabolism and catabolism applied to the social level.

Are we just supposed to watch while middle easterns and africans rape our women and create chaos in our cities, while the media praises them? Sometimes war is necessary because of other shitty people.

Stop causing problems in those places to begin with and just leave them alone as in don’t interact with them.

How's that any different from the atrocities committed in My Lai? Or Rwanda? Or Soviet Russia? Or the Ottoman Empire? Or the Roman Empire? Or in Sodom and Gomorrah? Humans have been doing this shit for thousands of years.

I do agree with your statement that us, human are the problem we create ideas we create system we are individual with different mind
But that come with the problem
Different ideas make us divide
We can't live together because we have different ideas from other
We create problems
We are the problems

Attached: 1556622814719.jpg (800x800, 243K)

We always have been

You guys hate humanity because you hate yourselves. You are just parroting anti-human philosophies propagated by the elites who despise life and think themselves to be gods.

Why did you reply to me when I said I'm both pro and anti humanist for different reasons?

No, i hate myself because i hate humanity and i'm part of it

What has humanity done to better the world?

The better system here many people secretly want, but few people know the name of, is Distributism.
In socialism, you end up with government holding all the power. With no competition, there is no punishment for incompetence and abuses.
In capitalism, you eventually end up with monopolies holding all the power, which also eventually leads to no competition, and thus no punishment if the monopoly decides to abuse its power or become incompetent.

Distributism avoids both of these flaws by giving everybody a little bit of power and property of their own to exercise as capitalists. When, over time, monopolies or very large corporations begin to reform, the government steps up to break the monopoly into smaller companies, starting the cycle over and stopping the worst bullshit of capitalism, without the need for violent revolution or socialism. And that's distributism.

In this way, distributism maximises the amount of positive competition between business in our society (which spurs innovation/progress), and avoids concentration of too much power in the hands of any one group.
Distributism has happened a few times in the past, for example when the American government stepped in to break up Standard Oil, which held 95% of America's oil sources, into multiple smaller oil companies, spurring a wave of competition and innovation. Many of those still exist today.

Attached: 1280px-Triangle_of_economic_systems.png (1280x824, 102K)

Many people on the right wing aren't satisfied with the excesses of corporations, but force themselves to defend capitalism because they don't want to be associated with socialism (and rightly so), but now you have your answer.

Even if we were to create a "better" world we'd end up rejecting it since we are not fit for constant exposure to pleasure. Every good thing that we experience diminishes the more our exposure to it is prolonged. Basically if you want to have humans who do well for themselves, just give them problems, challenges, put them in a situation where they forget how the good times feel and make them want to experience them again, so in turn they will try to create those good times.

In other words, humans need to forget things and then recreate things in other to feel content.

this guy and Daniel Plainview are quite possibly the most based men to have ever embraced fiction

Extremely cringe as is the game

Cringe

have

In other words, Social Democracy.

>implying they won't try to come into first world countries for gibs
Reminder than only 30% of the migrants were Syrian.

Corporatism is the answer

Why did he command him to kill him?