Leaderboard

Henderyjem doth protest too much, methinks. Personally, I don't think men and women can be friends in a meaningful way. One or the other tends to be friend zoned and that's a really shitty position to be in.

So what is your ideal scenario here; preventing dehumanization? Or punishing people for violating a standard to which you adhere? In regards to the Constitution, just in case anyone is interested, Lysander Spooner argued quite cogently against it's validity shortly after the Civil War in his essay No Treason No. VI: The Constitution of No Authority. Here is the introduction.

Bullshit.

Does the first amendment allow for pornography? Meh, probably, the constitution is designed to restrain the power of government, not be an exhaustive list of rights granted to the public, but who cares. I never signed that social contract so I don't respect it as legitimate. That said, virtue only exists in the face of abstaining from vice--there'd be no such thing as sobriety if alcohol wasn't cheaply available at every corner store. So I'd say it's probably a net benefit. Virtue has to be difficult to obtain. It's not a virtue to abstain from rubbing the head of your penis with sand paper, but now it can be legitimately claimed that chastity is a virtue with the ease of access to virtually unlimited hd porn and the prevalence/normalization of hookup culture.

Wow that brings me back. Spooner was one of the first things I read that started me on my current path. I thought I'd try to be a really edgy contrarian and write an essay for history class just to mess with the teacher. This was one of the sources I found. Turned out to be a rabbit hole with no bottom yet in sight.

Okay, here's a few syllogisms. 1. The state is predicated on the initiation of force. 2. The initiation of force is evil. 3. Therefore the state is an evil institution. 1. The state is an evil institution. 2. Bankers profit based on people's response to government incentives. 3. Therefore bankers profit from an evil institution. 1. The state is an evil institution. 2. Lawyers give justifications to the legitimacy of state power. 3. Therefore lawyers justify an evil institution. 1. My children will have to live in the world that I'm affecting. 2. Choosing to be a banker/lawyer will affect the world negatively in the long term. 3. Therefore choosing to be a banker/lawyer is a violation of the nap of my future children. There are many other ways to make money and I'd also rather raise quality children than save up a lot of money to prepare for the fallout of a collapse that I'd be helping to orchestrate. Stock brokers aren't known for raising quality children, because of the demands of the job they end up being neglected, also a violation of the nap. Yes people are. They are being incentivized with tax programs like iras, 401ks, and inflation. And with this escape hatch talk, there's not going to be aglobal shtf scenario. Things will get bad in some places for a certain amount of time before normalizing. And those most effected will be those who dont have some kind of contingency in place. Just because communism is worse than cronyism doesn't mean that cronyism is good. That was my point. So is it better to get stabbed than to be shot? Is cronyism better than communism? How about neither. This is fantasy on your part. This will either never happen or the warning signs will be so obvious that you can easily leave where you are. Mad max is just a movie, not a prophecy. Sure, but again, its one thing to live in a society where slavery is permitted and another thing to profit from it. You can't help the society you are born into but that doesn't make participating in immorality any less immoral. There's no other prison I'd rather be in, but my preferred choice is to not be in any prison. Just because there are worse prisons doesn't make ours good. It's the same continuum. No it doesn't. That's just blaming the victim. Someone who is a murder for 12 seconds is characterized for the rest of his life as a murderer because any good that he might do is almost certainly outweighed by his evil. My point is that we characterize people by the evil that they do and that it takes a lot of good to outweigh a single evil act if it's possible at all. Can a murderer do enough good in the world to counter balance their ills? Maybe, but probably not, so it's better to not murder in the first place. Can a banker do enough good in the world to counter balance their ills? Maybe, but probably not, so it's better to not be a banker in the first place.

(One of) the premises to your argument is the validity of Muh-Constitution, which I completely reject. Muh-Constitution is at the end of the day, just paper. If your society is founded on merely paper, then your society is on very shaky grounds. It is no surprise that Muh-Constitution has failed to achieve almost all of its intended purposes. Sooner or later, the biological realities of r/k selection, race, and IQ will take their course. Among all k-selected races, pornography had - up until 30 years ago - been seen as immoral as it is a close substitute for actual sex, which allows men sexual gratification without having to pay a woman with commitment, resources, kids, etc. When we let Muh-Constitution dictate our norms, foreign norms can potentially become normalized. There is only one group of people whose survival relies on the degeneracy of whites by normalizing behaviors that are seen as immoral, and that is the ((( Jews ))). Incidentally, ((( they ))) are the only group of people who openly take pride in controlling the porn industry. The solution to the Jewish problem is the solution to porn, as we would return to ostracizing porn consumption.

Muh Jewish problem is silly. The merchant might be selling but the goy is still buying. Also, jews aren't monolithic.

The goyim never bought public education and public media, which present pornography as a norm to young teenagers and if you disagree you're a white judgmental deplorable bigot. So of course, when you are raised by the government from young age - as most people are - which cucks its own people to the ((( Jews ))), then of course you will be cultureless. You will see nothing wrong with pornography if its been normalized the whole time. Monolothic... like... say... education, media, banks, Jewish state, porn, and the greatest lie ever told known as Hitler?

I don't know what the solution is yet, but I'm actually exploring for NAP-compliant solutions. If I come to a falsifiable conclusion, then I'll definitely post my theory / evidence.

If you're going to be this much of an edge Lord you'd better learn to use the echoes correctly. They're supposed to imply jews like (((reporters))). Just putting the word jew with the echoes is improper form since you're not implying anything as you already named them. In your world whites have no agency. No, whites want to watch porn so they seek it out. They want to be told comfortable lies so they seek out msm. If whites didn't want to partake in whatever degeracy makes you want to clutch your pearls then they wouldn't do it. For instance, there is no amount of (((influence))) that could make you think rubbing the head of your penis with sand paper is beneficial. Hence, the merchant is only selling because the goy is buying. 3edgy 5me. Of course there's a lot of jews in education, media, banks, etc. Those all require high iqs to succeed and the average Jewish iq is 15 points above the average. But again, the merchant is only selling what the goy is willing to buy.