• sorry I was away, will make a post on why soon

I made these arguments against modern society

#1
And was heavily criticized for it

I think Marx was right about class warfare he was just a bad sociologist because all of his reasonings were based in epistemological materialism, i.e., class warfare is a result of an ontological creation of Yahweh (Satan's inversion), the evil world we inhabit it was predestined to happen, otherwise class distinctions wouldn't exist. I also made the argument that atheists try to disprove God's existence by implying the name of God, i.e., "God isn't real" then why give them personhood?
also Adorno's authoritarian personality argument is flawed because most people who talk extensively about oppression often slip up in their arguments (Freudian slips), as in how Tom Arnold said he'd rather have Hitler than Trump show's the liberal's true nature, they desire domination. same can be said of fatherless sons and daughters, becoming criminals and whores. they desire jail and other 'prisons' such as abuse and the existential dread of having diseases because they in short, are slaves to passion, a passion that remains unfilled due to having no fatherly care.

He then asked about other feminine deities

I responded: Chokmah explains why women live longer, Shekinah explains impulsivity of women, Asherah is the advice giver, "strong woman backs a strong man", Deborah, intuition, Ruth, the mother figure. thats how I see it. there were a lot of female druidesses and often advisors to leaders, to give the leader a human face to his community. the entire "what about the children" argument is a mix of Deborah and Ruth. women exist to continue the existence of all people, but since the system is broken due to ideas that contribute to man's original sin and sins thereafter, Satan exploits that and that's why you have memes like "the 1000 cock stare", the hollow woman, who feels nothing for her fellow man but also seeks medicinal and sexual therapy to dull the pain of her own existence. she is not serving her purpose due to her father not being present, either a metaphysical father (explanation of atheism) or physical (absentee father chasing his own desires). the entirety of humanity rests on not chasing the desires of the self but chasing the higher purpose of life.

He then started to short circuit saying I was using Jewish tactics. Muh "incel theology" and all sorts of other riff raff. Then Cyberlich continues on in the attached pics
Screenshot_20191005-152447.png Screenshot_20191005-152045.png Screenshot_20191005-152050.png




@Shred Hed @Caamib
 
#5
this guy missed the point:

"Nigga wait one patty-flippin minute


>women are evil "Probably not" >no dude they are "lmao you mad you ain't got one" >quit mocking me wot


That isn't punching down or whatever


you're just being a turboautist"

as if being autistic is bad.
 
#6
I said:

Entertain me. Would you kill a homeless man for having less money than you?
Or would you give him the ability to make money in a business you own or have stake in?
You have the power to make differences in people's lives. Use it wisely
We have the power to help each other instead of stabbing each in the back

He said:

"Entertain me."
No lol

I said:

"No lol" because you won't answer my question. clones are fine.(edited)
@Darmody I never thought anyone was mocking me
I just wanted to tell him if he's religious, he should atone for his own sins instead of the sins of others
"I have a wife and kids and you don't" is the same as "I have money and you don't so rot in an alleyway"
its not the act of mockery, its an act of arrogance and egoism
"the haves and have nots"

this is a society

a friend asked: are you ok bro?

I responded with:

yeah I'm fine
just stating facts
I had a pretty good evening actually
I think people think I'm mad only because of the passion I delivered my platitudes in when my face was mostly these the whole time: :ROFLMAO::rolleyes: (no "expressionless face" icon available here)
the internet is an illusion to actual IRL expression
it seemed to me the one guy actually got pissed
"and I don't stand for that fucking proto-dialectical materialist pseudo-hermaneutical redaction of ancient texts AT ALL" those caps tho
it seems I struck a nerve
I am the Feyerabend of theological philosophy
most people who say lol are actually doing this IRL: :rolleyes: ( again, couldn't find a straight face icon so this will do)
"gUrLz HaVe CoOtIeS & r BaD Retroactively re-writing the entire history of biological organisms evolving sexual reproduction and the history of an entire religious symbolic vocabulary to fit your pathological aversion to women."(edited)
I REALLY struck a nerve with this guy
I don't even have a pathological aversion to women, I'm stating ontological psychoanalytic reasoning for societal decay
 
Last edited:
#9
this is what prompted the final blow. its like nobody can have discourse without sperging out.

ofc I found out from a mystic friend of mine is name is literally the demiurge, explains the egoism

mr blocker 2.png
 
#10
In the case of ialdaboath, I think those famous sage words of Felix Kjellberg apply:


What is it with these touchy online dilettantes and their ubiquitous obsession with Darwin? Like I said in the Peterson thread, Darwinian evolution is invariably beloved of the dumb and sated monkey man who seeks to justify his slavish complacency with the world as it is, of the degenerated Narcissus in love with his pocked and jowly visage.

What is hilarious to me is he gets riled up at you for your "fucking proto-dialectical materialist pseudo-hermaneutical redaction of ancient texts AT ALL" (What is he even trying to say? Your approach sounded much more like Eliade or Jung. Is this guy part of the genderqueer Hip Hop head DSA-Left? He writes like it) and then makes recourse to Darwin's theory of evolution, which is damn near biological Marxism in its purely material ontology and faith in progressive development; you could just about replace "dialectical materialism" with "adaptation", "base" with "environment", "superstructure" with "species" - despite being what appears to be a Traditionalist Catholic - only because its system of values allows him to claim success because he has a fat old wife.

What astonishes me is the degree of investment some of these normalniggers have in defending strong wymyn. They always claim it's because of the "amayyyyyyzing women in their life" and immediately go on to use the discussion as an opportunity to compare themselves (good, strong, incredibly talented, redpilked) to "incels" (bad, unsurvival of the fitless genes, Mountain Dew, bluepilked). This reveals that, like all cowards and idiots, their kicks derive from flaunting status and since this guy clearly can't do it with his intellect he resorts to this option. It's still kind of weird for these obviously defective online-types to have their tender vanities so closely bound up with their meager successes in romance.

Related, did you see that Erik Kiker was trying to start an Alternative Right Wing grrrrrrrrrls club recently? The guy is clearly a good presenter/speaker, but he's a damn clown sometimes. It turns out the based Hot Topic stripper grrrls just "brag" about getting buttfucked and talk about perfume. That's "the movement" and its grand ideas.

Fact of the matter is that holes ruin everything they touch in non-domestic matters. A lot of them even treat me well - and I can appreciate them just fine in certain respects - and I can still recognize this. "Men" who salivate over opportunities to defend women online are incredibly suspect to me.
 
Last edited:
Top