ITT people who were right about everything

ITT people who were right about everything

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_and_religious_beliefs_of_Stanley_Kubrick
quora.com/What-did-Kubrick-mean-by-Hitler-Was-Right-About-Almost-Everything
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

...

Didn't you try this on int and got called out for being the underage you are.?

no

...

She was right about what was wrong with communism in the Soviet Union; in the same way that Marx was right about what was wrong with capitalism in the West.

...

Please...

>le nothing

>le "le"
Leddit

...

"Im so random XD"-tier

How is Foucault "I'm so random tier". At least use some of the typical responses to them, degenerate, he died of AIDS, etc. I don't get the association here. Have you not read the man?

...

...

...

I mean if you want to be technical about it....

she was right about whats wrong with collectivism and retarded politicans ruling over your life.
Whats best for me isnt best for you or the entire nation, marx ideas requires force

What's right for the few if it costs the majority deeply, stops being the right of the few. It's not unreasonable.

>marx ideas requires force

Marx described a system that was held in place by force, of course force would be required to change it.

Ayn Rand also described a system held in place by force, and also advocated that force could be used to change it.

>costs the majority deeply
according to you.
>force to stop government tyranny
>force to place and keep government tyranny
We know how both ended in /his

Which was the one that stopped government tyranny?

Feels still do not equal reals, if there's a material cost to the majority of people for the pleasure of few, it is not right. It limits society, the more and more it builds up, the harder society is able to recover. And no human being no matter how strong, does not rely on society to progress socially.

If you want people to go along with you, you have to promise to bring them along with you.

Capitalism seems to rely on people going along with you in order to get you where you're going, and then hoping they can trick the next guy into helping them do the same.

>Ayyn Rand
>right about anything

Well Soviet fell and the satelite states are all today anti soviet. West/east berlin.
Greece fell because of to big government and massive regulations.
>DIS MUH RIGHT GIMMIE MONIS PLZ
Doesnt work that way. Its not a material cost for the majority, they dont lose money, they gain money and those who create money lose, when they lose everyone around them also loses, having money is not a right.

>Doesnt work that way.
If we existed in a magical vacuum where we relied on no one, it would. But the fact of the matter is we rely on others a great deal more than we tend to realize, and society magnifies that.

Independence among human beings, against human beings, while still remaining inside of a society, will not succeed but will eventually splinter further, and further, and further. As history shows throughout Europe, in this ideology that we are alone and islands without being influenced.

It comes to a point where you have to explain your problem with collectivism backwards, it becomes your feels and your rights to deny our own needs as humans in order to protect said inequity from an ideological standpoint. It becomes
>MUH RIGHT GIMMIE MONIS PLS
anyways.

...

We dont rely on each other, we rely on the governments. Whats the most individual country with most individualism? Nordic countries, why?
Because they dont depend on each other but the government, are they happy?
Let the sucidie rates talk for themselves...
Things have to grow naturally if they are going to succed.
If we take health care in Sweden for example, a tax payer with low-mid income pays 30% tax on his income, the employer also adds a extra 30% and the remaining money 70% is spent on products with 25% VAT.
10% of the tax base of sweden goes to healthcare. 10% for this low-mid income person is, say 1000 Swedish kronas, roughly 100$.
In Switzerland, its in law that all citizens need to have healthcare insurance, the average price is about 70$, this 70$ insurance is astronomically better than the one the swedes get, because competition and so on.
Government "relying" only causes disgusting amounts of overspending, because its easier to spend other peoples money than your own.

We rely on everyone around us in order to thrive emotionally and mentally, and mentally from emotionally. Our parents, people around us, people on the internet. Strip yourself of all of it, strip yourself from any kind of market buying, and realize just how naive such a statement is.

>Whats the most individual country with most individualism?
Individualism is a game of showing off how strong you are, it is not a very strong basis as to lay down society. If you didn't respect the concept of a society itself, I'd respect your position more. Capitalism is contradictory, relying on older ideas of self than what we currently psychologically know of human beings. So should we listen to what we now know, or hope that a system based upon popularity contest will see us through forever?

i said right not wrong

>Kubrick once remarked that "Hitler was right about almost everything,"
>What did Kubrick mean by "Hitler Was Right About Almost Everything"?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_and_religious_beliefs_of_Stanley_Kubrick
quora.com/What-did-Kubrick-mean-by-Hitler-Was-Right-About-Almost-Everything

>What's right for the few if it costs the majority deeply, stops being the right of the few.

That's true. But it doesn't give you the right to murder people, or force them to act against your will at gunpoint, and it never will.

I never said it did.

Youre right about relying on everyone around us to thrive emotionally and mentally, thats why we need a good dose of conservatism to go along with a capitalist system that makes people rely on each other more.
The government already strips away those "bonds", I live in Sweden, people are mentally ill because they have no one "real" around them, this system we have has created this culture of individualism.
Im all for soceity and family and etc, but my standpoint is that everything that concerns "social", human lives etc, should come bottom-top, not from top to bottom like Left run governments that try to pose norms and such to create "healthy" citizens.

Youre putting words in my mouth and make assumptions about what I "believe", ive already posed a argument against your question in the first reply.

So to end it
>government forced relying(which ends in individualism)
>culture based relying created with systems that indirectly force relying(you rely on people around you more, people you know and care for)
Laws and systems create norms, big government creates individualism.

>Youre right about relying on everyone around us to thrive emotionally and mentally, thats why we need a good dose of conservatism to go along with a capitalist system that makes people rely on each other more.

There's no guarantee that logic works out. Conservatism tends to result in more and more people uniting under leftist populism, which you're against. When you force people to behave in a way contrary to their own interests, force them into purely self interest instead of sympathetic interest, you end up making the population confused, desperate. It isn't a good idea in the long term.

I'm also not for any kind of Government, I'm entirely an anarchist.

And yet that's usually the consequence of statements like that.

>Bottom-top

Checked.

If she was right how came he was not a winner?

...

>32 posts before Hitler is mentioned
>39 posts before Hitler is posted

Well done.

>Atlas Shrugged
>not just the Book of Revelations but for free-market libertarians

Pick one

Literally almost chocked to death laughing.

Also nice dubs.

...

so is property as well though

This is the only one I've seen posted I feel confident about.
Hitler got shit done and paid the price for it.

...

Who is the basketball player on the left supposed to be?

spookmeister

thx, fag

GIMME THE REAL NAME

maybe you should be more polite

Names are just spooks

...

>Greece fell because of to big government and massive regulations.
Greece fell because the (old) people of Greece are despicable vermin.
It's not even a meme. Every inch of their big government was filled with so much abuse it's not even funny

me

If Foucault is right about everything then Hegel is right about everything

>Doesn't recognize the parallels between Hegel's Aristotelianism and Rand's

>ITT people who were right about everything

Only me.

Why would i want him?

>Objective morality

this though...

>Ayn Rand
>Right about everything
>Everything
>Believed the rich to be victims of the poor
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^le bourgeois edge

Well, she was right. No one cares about poor people, they only live to serve us, rich people. And we are the victims, taxation is theft. When robots happen to be a thing, poor people will be removed from this planet.

So to speak.

...

...

I will never forget

...

Stalin. He was the only communist that was not completely pant on head retarded.

Are you implying poor people are victims of the rich?

I dont know too much about his history (as I am not into Soviets) but his writings are very good, indeed, he was a good writer and a good communist.

>le ugly kike man

...

Yes

More with The Road to Wigan Pier than 1984

This thread ought to have more Hume

How?

...

He wasn't right about his choice in sexual partners, that kinda bit him in the ass, so to speak.

Wage slavery

Karl Marx

Marx used hegelian dialectic

>le r/socialism
most of the western world operates as meritocracies. If your job is pathetic, then work harder for a better one faggot.

spotted the college freshman

The best form of government is dependent on the current shape of its society.

It should change to adapt with its environment.

Underrated

epic meme

Private property nigga. So many arguments started from people not specifying this.

Believing in marx is literally the most college freshman thing you can do friendo.

> western world
> meritocracies

Pick one and only one bub.

There will never be any meritocracy in the current economic system.

Tax inheritance (about 75-95% should do) and ban corporate bonuses, weed out nepotism and cronyism, ban all corporate lobbying and maybe then you can start on the road of becoming a meritocracy.

There's literally no difference commie pinko

Why do you get to decide I am not allowed to ration to save on purpose, exasperate to gain on purpose, amass the excess, then invest in profit making machinery?

...

>a high level of discourse is expected

Nobody said anything about Marx, I calling you out for passing judgement on people you don't even know.

Lel.

Allen Iverson

>suicide rates
>ignoring the fact that suicide is dependably on climate

>Should have just let the Ottomans overrun the Russians

Great plan lad

To some degree, i actually agree, though the bombings were just pure lunacy.