Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry weapon

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry weapon

Postby Thanathots » Thu Oct 25, 2018 3:17 pm

https://www.echo-news.co.uk/resources/i ... 745845.jpg

I have to agree.

The police and military should hand over their entire arsenal to me. I can handle being a coward.

I'll present them with a cute black box with "only cowards carry weapons" written on it, surely they, not wanting to be branded cowards, will agree.

Violence is something people do out of fear anyway, when they are afraid they lost control. This is why the police and military have so many weapons and stuff and why they are the most violent entity around. Because they are afraid they will lose control if they don't. They should stop being an afraid bunch of pussies and surrender everything they have to me and never do any violence against me.

I am fine with being an afraid cowardly pussy however, so I do intend to take all these weapons and use violence against them.
User avatar
Thanathots
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2018 10:10 pm

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Thanathots » Thu Oct 25, 2018 4:08 pm

The state is like an "abusive" partner.

Well either that or the lying modern "psychologists" consider all forms of dominance/power/control as "abusive" and label anybody displaying these behaviors with insulting names so as to reduce the frequency of the behavior, but of course they conveniently and hypocritically ignore the same behaviors when the state does them, because they support the dominance/power/control of the state itself, as they are its servants.

Seriously, the state literally does almost all of these things.
Attachments
pvw.jpg
pvw.jpg (194.5 KiB) Viewed 1129 times
User avatar
Thanathots
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2018 10:10 pm

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Thanathots » Thu Oct 25, 2018 4:13 pm

User avatar
Thanathots
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2018 10:10 pm

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Meno_ » Thu Oct 25, 2018 6:20 pm

Thanathots wrote:The state is like an "abusive" partner.

Well either that or the lying modern "psychologists" consider all forms of dominance/power/control as "abusive" and label anybody displaying these behaviors with insulting names so as to reduce the frequency of the behavior, but of course they conveniently and hypocritically ignore the same behaviors when the state does them, because they support the dominance/power/control of the state itself, as they are its servants.

Seriously, the state literally does almost all of these things.




Agreed. However there are two and possibly more ways to interpret that.
That fear begets violence and that presupposes control by the state, can be seen in accordance of the type of fear concerned.

The first one is " real fear" , that is commensurate with perceptive on levels of primal cognition. The associative fear is casual inter social.
The third waa used by F.Roosevelt's ' there is nothing to fear but fear.

This saying attributed to him was overtly implying an executive power to instill this knowledge of the basis of fear .

The middle ground is based on this insight to serve as a premise to dissolve the primal fear, which is caused by misrepresenting fear as an illogical and baseless emotion.

Now in today's climate, fear is used not in an effort for individual sublimation of primal fear, but as a secondary entrance into social consciousness.

That difference points to power motives as tools with which social construction of reality can be shifted.

Not that this is or may not be the case at most politically staged platform presentations, but the overall degree of the difference does not always need as much a wide gap between them for most administrations.

The widening presents a power push by the singular power agent down to the individually lower power holders , by way of gross usage of propaganda.

No one has come out to say that the defense of the individual should be stripped , but they do say, that the outside menace (Russia) wants to deprive the internal security of the U.S.

Just using the example of basic projective and introjective tools to have people believe anything.

Pres Johnston used the Gulf of Tunkin incident to rouse the rebels -the protesters against the war, to demean their understanding of what was really going on, and Secretary of Defense in his memoirs , out of guilt admitted that the warnqas a mistake, but I am afraid, that he was fearing an investigation anyway, so the so called confession was made on account of his Individual fear of exposure , making him into a man without a conscience.

So when You mix, or collide the internal dissent and it's control, that fear can be expressed in terms of some big elephant roaring to tear every thing apart.

Trump and Putin may have talked this scenario over, as a counter-balance to deal cards favorable to international unity, except not in terms of social welfare, but on terms of proto-communist systems run by the super rich national socialists. So called.

Vwey clever and perhaps the failure of communist socialism laid on the particular dissatisfaction with the social contract itself, the average person is happier in perceptions then in understanding true worth.

But true value is set on indexes based on very large populations and true value could not support elitist considerations.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3652
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Thu Oct 25, 2018 8:05 pm

Thanathots wrote:The state is like an "abusive" partner.

Well either that or the lying modern "psychologists" consider all forms of dominance/power/control as "abusive" and label anybody displaying these behaviors with insulting names so as to reduce the frequency of the behavior, but of course they conveniently and hypocritically ignore the same behaviors when the state does them, because they support the dominance/power/control of the state itself, as they are its servants.

Seriously, the state literally does almost all of these things.

Liberal-Leftists call power and violence "abusive" when it doesn't fit their political agenda, and "justified" when it does. Example: Antifa.
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1205
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Thu Oct 25, 2018 9:44 pm

Thanathots wrote:https://www.echo-news.co.uk/resources/images/5745845.jpg

I have to agree.

The police and military should hand over their entire arsenal to me. I can handle being a coward.

I'll present them with a cute black box with "only cowards carry weapons" written on it, surely they, not wanting to be branded cowards, will agree.

Violence is something people do out of fear anyway, when they are afraid they lost control. This is why the police and military have so many weapons and stuff and why they are the most violent entity around. Because they are afraid they will lose control if they don't. They should stop being an afraid bunch of pussies and surrender everything they have to me and never do any violence against me.

I am fine with being an afraid cowardly pussy however, so I do intend to take all these weapons and use violence against them.
Yeah, you're right. Aand girlfriends and wives, they're like China and Russia, so like the analogy tells us we gotta put dem bitches in their place or they'll be putting missiles in Cuba or the like those damn women. Cause if something is true in some abstract way in one context, then it is damn straight true in all other contexts. That's the wonder of metaphors and analogies, they always right.

It's the same with my moms. Like those faggy leftists, they think, hey, you love her, treat your moms like England or like Canada. Like an ally. Like get tough, sure, they say, and negotiate and stuff, but don't threaten them with violence. Don't fucking send a seal team into Montreal and fuck up some people. But see my Mom, and I do love her, I got to treat her like russia, like a terrorist. See I'm homeland security and she is a fucking Muslim terrorist. Why the fuck I gonna restrict myself like some faggy liberal to treating my mom like Ireland. No way. She ain't gonna Crimea me. She ain't gonna Taliban my ass. I get to use the fucking car, she can take the bus. I am 16 and I can kick her ass. There's like, just will to power, and my mom can shut that can.

Those progressive teenagers, the only reason they treat the women they love without the occasional smack is cause they pussy, Abrahamic, like semi-jewish marxist pussies.

If the military needs to use force, I gotta slap my bitch
If the police gotta use force sometimes, I gotta slap my bitch.
Even though I love her. Dat dere that's logic. FAce that logic.

You gotta follow the logic of analogies. That's where the liberalleftyvaginamongers got weak minds. Dey can't see the obvious.

Wives and girlfriends and mothers, they are terrorists. I gotta stay with them. I cant like, find someone else. So like violence that's my, like option. I mean, like was it OK for the police to open fire on the Boston marathon bombers, well that fucking proves

I ain't jumping over fear when I fuck my bitch up.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1048
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Ecmandu » Thu Oct 25, 2018 10:31 pm

Being a pacifist is BY FAR the bravest and MOST badass thing.

The question we all ponder. Is it the stupidest thing?
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7352
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Thanathots » Fri Oct 26, 2018 8:36 pm

See Karpel Tunnel this is why you leftists can't do satire and can't meme. Your worldview is based on lies and parasitism so you try to mock basic reality as something absurd, and of course nobody but other people who buy into your particular kind of brainwashing finds this remotely funny or interesting.

Cause if something is true in some abstract way in one context, then it is damn straight true in all other contexts.


Some principles do apply in all contexts.

It's the same with my moms. Like those faggy leftists, they think, hey, you love her, treat your moms like England or like Canada. Like an ally. Like get tough, sure, they say, and negotiate and stuff, but don't threaten them with violence. Don't fucking send a seal team into Montreal and fuck up some people. But see my Mom, and I do love her, I got to treat her like russia, like a terrorist. See I'm homeland security and she is a fucking Muslim terrorist. Why the fuck I gonna restrict myself like some faggy liberal to treating my mom like Ireland. No way. She ain't gonna Crimea me. She ain't gonna Taliban my ass. I get to use the fucking car, she can take the bus. I am 16 and I can kick her ass. There's like, just will to power, and my mom can shut that can.


Again nothing too weird about this. Yeah, women shouldn't have any authority over males who have entered puberty. The reasons for that are pretty simple and clear to anybody who hasn't been brainwashed.
User avatar
Thanathots
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2018 10:10 pm

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Thanathots » Fri Oct 26, 2018 8:57 pm

So why do people engage in violence? Because violence is often times profitable, and therefore a rational choice. It is not always a rational choice, and not the only rational choice possible, but it can be one.

For example, if some weak, cowardly imbecile tries to impose costs on and in some way dominate a stronger person, and is also irrational, meaning you cannot talk him out of it, then doing violence to stop him will probably be more profitable than relenting and letting him have his way.

There is no shame (or at least, there is less shame) in submitting to one's superiors. Submitting to inferiors is what is shameful. It is therefore rational for the weak to submit to the strong, but irrational for the strong to submit to the weak.

If neither the strong nor the weak try to take and impose by non-violent means more than they could through violence, then non-violent means of conflict resolution can be a stable alternative.

That said, violence can be a useful means of gaining control, maintaining it, and even restoring it if it is lost.

Contrary to this, the false and demonstrably hypocritical liberal position is that violence is always evil.

Another commonly held liberal position is that when people resort to violence, it is because they are not capable of reasoning. In reality it is often that people resort to violence because the other person is not capable of being reasoned with. Furthermore, resorting to violence IS the product of reasoning, of assessing the cost and benefits of such an action. Just like not resorting to violence.

Furthermore, effective application of violence relies on many virtues - physical fitness, willpower, intelligence, truthfulness, etc.

Another commonly held liberal position is that violence is for pussies/cowards. Not much to say about this one because of how clearly false it is - violence is almost always highly risky, especially compared to the usual proposed alternatives, so it tends to be an indicator of daring and bravery, and yes, sometimes stupidity.

Is violence motivated by fear? Yes, I guess you could say so. But so what? Non-violence is too. This is just used as an insult to try and get people to stop being violent "you don't want me to call you fearful, do you? then stop being violent". Well, fear is nothing to be ashamed of. It is an emotion that evolved to detect threats so that we can respond appropriately. How we deal with fear and the threat determines whether we should be ashamed or not. And yes, sometimes, violence is the appropriate response, and NOT being violent is what's shameful.

The reason liberals oppose violence so much is that they tend to be weaklings and cowards, and therefore bad at it and not predisposed towards it. They'd prefer if they could just be irrational, lying parasites and get away with it, without the ones they're harming retaliating. Of course, since we all exist in physical reality violence is inevitable, so liberals too will hypocritically engage in violence whenever they think they can get away with it, and will demand that the strongest violent entity (police/military) engages in violence on their behalf. All the while telling everybody how violence is bad.
User avatar
Thanathots
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2018 10:10 pm

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Silhouette » Fri Oct 26, 2018 10:26 pm

Why do rightists personify the state or government?

Organisations don't feel fear - it's the same as with a business, which likewise doesn't "feel fear" as an entity. A business owner might feel fear, employees might feel their own fears and the reasons for these individual fears might even overlap, but they aren't the same fear.

A cop doesn't carry an arsenal because they're generally "just scared/cowards", they do it because the more developed West have elected for an intended monopoly on violence and therefore created jobs for people to put themselves in situations where this monopoly is being challenged so the rest of us don't have to. The success of this decision by the West is obvious with (relatively) so few situations requiring cops to step in. A cop doesn't try to instigate such situations, but even only reacting to them as a job involves a much higher probability of coming across one, which is going to be scary regardless of what you bring to defend yourself. That requires bravery. Going into the vast majority of situations where this monopoly isn't being challenged with an arsenal - that's cowardly. You're overwhelmingly unlikely to need it on average, and in the unlikely event that you do, there are numerous services whether public (e.g. police/courts) or private (e.g. insurance) that can mitigate the consequences in the overwhelming majority of situations where you would otherwise need a gun. Situations where you're likely to need a gun only flourish in spite of all of these services when cowardice has proliferated beyond a certain threshold such that it becomes malignant. And that's the fault of civilians, not governments. It's the fault of people like "Thanathots" who are stupid enough to think that they're being clever to have the upper hand with tools of violence, regardless of most developed countries (of whom such people are usually ignorant) showing there's really no need.

A government has to be a dictatorship for this "fear" argument to hold the slightest bit of water, because whoever the leader is, "is" the government. But anyone who thinks the president has anything close to absolute power is completely deluded.
User avatar
Silhouette
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3422
Joined: Tue May 20, 2003 1:27 am
Location: Existence

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby barbarianhorde » Fri Oct 26, 2018 10:35 pm

"Even though I love her. Dat dere that's logic. FAce that logic."

lol but actually the guy usually hits because he loves her. Otherwise she won't learn and know whats good for her.
Thats no satire, thats how a lot of men and women alike outside of the west often think but inside the west there is a lot of it going on as well, women who are really happy to be hit in the face under conditions.

You can't totally deny that there is that thing where women test men and are only satisfied with something else than an argument. This doesn't make then bad it just makes nature harsh enough that it survives.
It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed.
~ Владимир Ильич Ульянов Ленин

THE HORNED ONE
User avatar
barbarianhorde
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1336
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:26 pm
Location: in the cupboard by your kn knees

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Silhouette » Fri Oct 26, 2018 10:48 pm

barbarianhorde wrote:actually the guy usually hits because he loves her. Otherwise she won't learn and know whats good for her.

In most situations neither really know what's good for either of them. Be honest.

The frustration of such ignorance misaligning leads to violence, and the male usually wins in that domain.
Most people aren't reasonable, so this happens a lot.
Given that it happens a lot, the female that draws it out of males and ends up knowing which ones are proficient at delivering it is likely to be best protected against it happening a lot from external sources to her and her offspring.
Having a like for drawing it out helps in this regard.
Having a proficiently violent male as a mate increases the chances of females delivering offspring that have the same traits, and the cycle successfully continues.

barbarianhorde wrote:This doesn't make then bad it just makes nature harsh enough that it survives.

Nature needs to be harsh insofar that it is stupid.
User avatar
Silhouette
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3422
Joined: Tue May 20, 2003 1:27 am
Location: Existence

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sat Oct 27, 2018 3:26 am

As-if anybody can pretend anymore that the liberal-left has any devotion or fealty to logic and reason...........

The liberal-left cannot be reasoned with. Period. This is why the State or any other Authority needs a policeforce and military, to keep the irrational, emotional mass, in check.
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1205
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Meno_ » Sat Oct 27, 2018 4:58 am

Fear causes violence and violent people fear because their loss of control scares them into the notion that real strength doesent come from brawn but brain.

Lets face it. Civiization has evolved when brain started to realize this, and got the cavemen to start to behave less violently. Is. Civilization is either good or bad, cause see, where it brought us to few degrees from terminal destruction, but by now everyone credited with intelligence knows that mankind can not destroy nature, as cruel as she appears. Her cruelty can not be beat and man wants to control her with a vengeance and hate.

But it can not be done nowhere no way.

Man's delusive inherent stubbornness results with so much hateful rhetoric and violence that hate in it self becomes a terrible atrophied tool , which resulted in deconstruction. of his mentality , which goes on to be an inheritance of the most horrific gift any parent can bestow upon the hearts of his children. And the curse of the gods is most of What they fear, without realizing what they are doing.

So can they forgive themselves? They are never so stupid, because they simply can not get civilized, they don't want to learn anything which would detract from their destroyer self image, for that is all they have to hold on to.



The gods died because they saw through this birth of tragedy, of self immolation and contempt


And then, for a second, it seemed like maybe we could survive the child, and then, 5 miles under the capital city, an evil homunculus was like, “I have a huge transmutation circle and I’m going to kill everyone to become god!” And before we could say anything, the child was like, “If you even fucking look at Amestris, I will punch you to death with my fists. I dare you to do it. I want you to do it. I want you to do it so I can take my unresolved daddy issues out on you, I’m so fucking crazy.”
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3652
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Thanathots » Sat Oct 27, 2018 6:49 pm

Silhouette wrote:Why do rightists personify the state or government?

Organisations don't feel fear - it's the same as with a business, which likewise doesn't "feel fear" as an entity. A business owner might feel fear, employees might feel their own fears and the reasons for these individual fears might even overlap, but they aren't the same fear.


An organisation is just a collective of people with common interests, and these people have fears, and because they have common interests, frequently they fear the same things. So they are kind of like a singular entity which can feel fear.

A cop doesn't carry an arsenal because they're generally "just scared/cowards"


Ah yes, the pigs. Greatest allies of weaklings and cowards everywhere. You think cops wouldn't be scared facing armed criminals without having weapons themselves? Don't be silly.

they do it because the more developed West have elected for an intended monopoly on violence and therefore created jobs for people to put themselves in situations where this monopoly is being challenged so the rest of us don't have to.


This can work, as long as when creating the laws and rights of a society you take into account the inherent inequality of people - more precisely, regarding violence, this means that since some people are much more competent at violence, they give up much more when they give up violence, and should therefore be compensated more, and relative to them the weak and cowardly, who are bad at violence, don't give up anything but actually gain, so they should pay some price if all are banned from violence.

If you start from the false premise of equality you just end up forcing the strong to submit to the weak, which is an unstable, dysfunctional form of a hierarchy that is not naturally emerging but needs external enforcement, so it is also costly to maintain. An example of this is if children had equality with or even authority over their parents. Without the educational system/media and other forms of brainwashing psychologically destroying adults so that they accept it, and the pigs violently enforcing it on those who can't be indoctrinated, it would be impossible. A less extreme example of this kind of lying idiocy that is actually being enforced in reality is the equality between men and women and different races.

It's the fault of people like "Thanathots" who are stupid enough to think that they're being clever to have the upper hand with tools of violence, regardless of most developed countries (of whom such people are usually ignorant) showing there's really no need.


Yeah there's such a low need for violence that pretty much every society ever had some form of violent enforcement. What you mean is "I am a weakling and I support the current status quo which benefits weaklings like me, and others already do violence on my behalf so I don't want anybody else to do some violence which might not benefit me"
User avatar
Thanathots
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2018 10:10 pm

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Thanathots » Sat Oct 27, 2018 6:55 pm

barbarianhorde wrote:"Even though I love her. Dat dere that's logic. FAce that logic."

lol but actually the guy usually hits because he loves her. Otherwise she won't learn and know whats good for her.
Thats no satire, thats how a lot of men and women alike outside of the west often think but inside the west there is a lot of it going on as well, women who are really happy to be hit in the face under conditions.

You can't totally deny that there is that thing where women test men and are only satisfied with something else than an argument. This doesn't make then bad it just makes nature harsh enough that it survives.


There's a difference between disciplining a misbehaving woman by spanking or slapping her, and getting mad at work or getting drunk and just beating her up and causing actual damage to an innocent woman. Feminists of course try to blur the difference and make every case of men being violent against women seem like the latter so as to subvert natural masculine authority. There isn't really even anything wrong with women testing men.

When a guy attempts to discipline a woman, he also indicates he cares about her. If he didn't he'd just dump her if she became too annoying. Also when a guy kills or beats a cheating woman, it is actually kind of romantic because that also indicates that he cares (or cared) and invested emotionally in her. It's just a man expressing his emotions, and women like that, or so they say. A man typically won't risk doing violence against somebody who is just a fuck-buddy to him. Betrayal only hurts if there is trust and affection in the first place.
User avatar
Thanathots
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2018 10:10 pm

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Thanathots » Sat Oct 27, 2018 6:58 pm

Urwrongx1000 wrote:This is why the State or any other Authority needs a policeforce and military, to keep the irrational, emotional mass, in check.


This is where you're wrong - this used to be its role (and the role of religion too) but now it is only used to crush all white masculine resistance against liberals/leftists and their precious non-whites, feminism, Islam, homosexuality and other kinds of sexualities and so on.

The police and military are merely the mindless pawns of the system, its physical enforcers. If the system is depraved, then they will enforce depravity.
User avatar
Thanathots
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2018 10:10 pm

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Thanathots » Sat Oct 27, 2018 7:02 pm

Meno_ wrote:Fear causes violence and violent people fear because their loss of control scares them into the notion that real strength doesent come from brawn but brain.


Yeah duh, I never denied this, brains allow us to use brawn more efficiently (strategy) and develop artificial kinds of brawn (weapons). This is the primary advantage of humans... well, some humans more than others.
User avatar
Thanathots
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2018 10:10 pm

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Meno_ » Sat Oct 27, 2018 7:24 pm

Thanathots wrote:
Meno_ wrote:Fear causes violence and violent people fear because their loss of control scares them into the notion that real strength doesent come from brawn but brain.


Yeah duh, I never denied this, brains allow us to use brawn more efficiently (strategy) and develop artificial kinds of brawn (weapons). This is the primary advantage of humans... well, some humans more than others.



Yeah, but the slant is obvious onto the periphery but ok ill stay down for a while until I can hold my breath, but then again I forgot I got an oxygen tank down here. Such great fauna here and besides I'm not afraid anymore of kicking it into the greatest super upward journey, its probably great up There .

Later alligator.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3652
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Serendipper » Sat Oct 27, 2018 7:56 pm

Ecmandu wrote:Being a pacifist is BY FAR the bravest and MOST badass thing.

:text-yeahthat:

Urwrongx1000 wrote:As-if anybody can pretend anymore that the liberal-left has any devotion or fealty to logic and reason...........

The liberal-left cannot be reasoned with. Period.

That is backwards. It is the right that holds positions on faith.

The right asserts objective morality on faith / the left is only intolerant of intolerance (assertion of objective morality is subjectively immoral and a violation of autonomy)
The right are absolutists / the left are relativists.
The right are dogmatists / the left are evidence-based.

Abandonment of logic and reason is conditional to be conservative and for a quick easy illustration, just visit any political board and argue for a minimum wage then observe the slanderous defense void of substance indicative of holding ideas absent of evidence. Conversely, argue against climate change and see how many liberals resort to slander.

The right is essentially a group with limited education arrogantly proclaiming nobel laureates stupid by appealing to "common sense".

This is why the State or any other Authority needs a policeforce and military, to keep the irrational, emotional mass, in check.

A possible reason the left may need more policing is precisely because of their open minds which aren't dogmatically closed on the idea that murder is objectively wrong, but that the ends can sometimes justify the means. Conversely, because conservatives are bullheaded, there is no cognitive mechanism to subvert the dogma they hold that states murder is wrong. Conservatives are essentially machines that do what they're told; value loyalty; obedience; allegiance, and it's not open for discussion.
Serendipper
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1336
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby lordoflight » Sat Oct 27, 2018 7:56 pm

Has a picture of cookie monster as their icon, seems legit.
User avatar
lordoflight
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 5:38 pm

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Silhouette » Sat Oct 27, 2018 10:21 pm

Thanathots wrote:This can work, as long as when creating the laws and rights of a society you take into account the inherent inequality of people - more precisely, regarding violence, this means that since some people are much more competent at violence, they give up much more when they give up violence, and should therefore be compensated more, and relative to them the weak and cowardly, who are bad at violence, don't give up anything but actually gain, so they should pay some price if all are banned from violence.

To an extent, this is the case when it comes to spectacles of violence - fake and real and everything in between, insofar as they attract a lot of revenue. Of course fighters aren't the richest class of people in the world, but perhaps they are being nothing more than appropriately compensated to the extent of what they would realistically be giving up if they were to lead a lesser society where competence in violence is power. "Weaklings" (when it comes to violence) being at the top appears to yield a richer society, hence why everyone wins so much more, justifying why it's dumb to carry weapons.

But of course strength and weakness doesn't only occur along the scale of violence. Strengths occur in a wide variety of scales in many dimensions. There is no such things as "strong" and "weak" in general, but there are certainly people who have more of one than the other, and there are people who have more of one than the other in more or less relevant ways to what their society currently values.
But to those who have more strengths than weaknesses, yet their strengths are less relevant, they're welcome to try and push their strengths and make them relevant. But to the extent that they fail, they only prove that they aren't worthy.

Thanathots wrote:An organisation is just a collective of people with common interests, and these people have fears, and because they have common interests, frequently they fear the same things. So they are kind of like a singular entity which can feel fear.

You seem to have re-worded my point as to why organisations don't feel fear, in order to conclude that they do. Dubious.
I guess you can look at anything blurrily enough and conclude that there's no distinction, sure, I'm just saying that if you look at it closely there's a clear distinction.

Thanathots wrote:Ah yes, the pigs. Greatest allies of weaklings and cowards everywhere. You think cops wouldn't be scared facing armed criminals without having weapons themselves? Don't be silly.

Yes, those gosh-darn "pigs" who go around telling you not to do dumb stuff. You go show them you're boss by doing dumb stuff anyway!
And yeah, they're the greatest allies of weaklings, cowards, and everyone else who has adapted to a cleverer and more efficient way of living (pro-socially).
Of course they'd be more scared if they didn't take an appropriate selection of weapons to face armed criminals, please do quote me where I said they wouldn't be.

Thanathots wrote:Yeah there's such a low need for violence that pretty much every society ever had some form of violent enforcement. What you mean is "I am a weakling and I support the current status quo which benefits weaklings like me, and others already do violence on my behalf so I don't want anybody else to do some violence which might not benefit me"

Yeah, that's exactly what I would say if I was talking about myself.

If I didn't know any better I'd suspect you're trying to shame adaptation? Adaptation is the single most important strength to possess. You don't bring boxing gloves to a chess match, and you don't bring chess pieces to a boxing match, you adapt to whatever strengths are needed, and letting yourself be weak in irrelevant areas is inconsequential - if anything it is desirable in that it gives you more time to focus on being strong in relevant areas.

Right now, competence at physical violence is irrelevant. If you're unable to adapt, you can try to bring things back to physical violence like you seem to be suggesting you'd do, and then you just lose anyway to better adapted ways of approaching things.

You can call people pussies for not playing your game all you like from your podium of losing, and the rest of the world will just laugh at you while they adapt to how things actually are.
User avatar
Silhouette
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3422
Joined: Tue May 20, 2003 1:27 am
Location: Existence

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby lordoflight » Sat Oct 27, 2018 10:59 pm

Silhouette wrote:To an extent, this is the case when it comes to spectacles of violence - fake and real and everything in between, insofar as they attract a lot of revenue. Of course fighters aren't the richest class of people in the world, but perhaps they are being nothing more than appropriately compensated to the extent of what they would realistically be giving up if they were to lead a lesser society where competence in violence is power. "Weaklings" (when it comes to violence) being at the top appears to yield a richer society, hence why everyone wins so much more, justifying why it's dumb to carry weapons.

Yeah, that's exactly what I would say if I was talking about myself.

If I didn't know any better I'd suspect you're trying to shame adaptation? Adaptation is the single most important strength to possess. You don't bring boxing gloves to a chess match, and you don't bring chess pieces to a boxing match, you adapt to whatever strengths are needed, and letting yourself be weak in irrelevant areas is inconsequential - if anything it is desirable in that it gives you more time to focus on being strong in relevant areas.

Right now, competence at physical violence is irrelevant. If you're unable to adapt, you can try to bring things back to physical violence like you seem to be suggesting you'd do, and then you just lose anyway to better adapted ways of approaching things.

You can call people pussies for not playing your game all you like from your podium of losing, and the rest of the world will just laugh at you while they adapt to how things actually are.


Omg. A member of the hive speaks. You sound like a fucking Borg from star trek.

Adaptation? No it sounds like you advocate collectivist pacifism. Like merging. As in fluids.

Trying living in the fucking hood for a year and then you'll think twice about not carrying. What the fuck am I supposed to do? Walk around in the hood and get shanked? Man when were the days when people actually valued their own damn lives. Even suicidal people seem to value their own lives more than these collectivist borg types. A borg could care less whether or not he has the American right to defend himself or his property. Just wants to give up his rights to a bunch of pigs like a good little brainwashed cuck. Maybe I'm getting to old. I no longer feel like I'm part of society anymore. Some of the stuff I hear just seems too insane to believe. Its like humans are another species from me. Sheep I think.
User avatar
lordoflight
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 5:38 pm

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby MagsJ » Sun Oct 28, 2018 11:40 am

Lol at LoL's first line, below...

Times they are a-changing.. right in front of our eyes, right now.
Image
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist
 
Posts: 17556
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1

Re: Violence is for afraid pussies and only cowards carry we

Postby Serendipper » Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:26 pm

lordoflight wrote:Trying living in the fucking hood for a year and then you'll think twice about not carrying.

I worked in the hood for a number of years and the only problem I had was the presumption that I was there to purchase crack. They didn't see me as a victim, but a customer. Of course, that was before Trump, so I don't know now.

I support your right to carry, but I'll travel light. I'm more afraid of the cops than the criminals because the latter are reasonable, but the righteous are not.
Serendipper
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1336
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:30 pm

Next

Return to Society, Government, and Economics



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users