Why is it considered 'enlightened' to lay the blame for all the horrors and atrocities of the world at your own...

Why is it considered 'enlightened' to lay the blame for all the horrors and atrocities of the world at your own doorstep, and to disparage your culture, and even to openly advocate for its destruction? How did we get to the point where masochism on a mass scale is considered sophisticated and righteous rather than perverse and evil?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=_Rcc7xgD2dM
youtube.com/watch?v=Ele_dj3ud38
youtube.com/watch?v=kbL5L4r4Ars
slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything-except-the-outgroup/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Because it's easy to demonize The Other, but it requires introspection to examine your own faults.
Similarly to how it is easy to automatically cast your own efforts as "righteous and defensive" regardless of the consequences.

You can't do anything about others, but you can change your own policies.

>Because it's easy to demonize The Other, but it requires introspection to examine your own faults.
Actually, it's easiest to adhere to whatever the culture of your time dictates as the most likely scapegoat, which, today, is western civilization. There's no deep moral thought required to blame yourself and call yourself wretched and to prostrate yourself against the earth: Christians have been told to do this for millenia, and the most thoughtless of them do so with ease.

The only reason it seems thoughtful is because deep down, you know there's an instinct for self-preservation and self-respect you're gleefully subverting by doing so. It's just Freudian antics to get back at mommy Nature. There's no more depth here than the conundrum of God being three people and yet one person all at the same time.

Noam Chomsky has said the United States is the best country in the world. One should hold ones own culture to the highest standards and criticize that which you actually have the power to change.

You seem upset about something.

It's considered enlightened to examine your own actions with the same lens you examine others actions.

Most pseudo-intellectual post I've seen here all week.

I'm sorry that a 2000 year old death cult that teaches that self-defense is wicked is your idea of the height of moral sophistication.

I'm genuinely sorry that you are lost in some reactionary paranoia stupor and bumble in here venting your angst to no-one in particular, setting up intellectual wiffle balls to be effortlessly batted away.

He's also called it the most evil empire in the world along with the United Kingdom. He has a veneer of patriotism, and he happened to hit on a valid point when criticizing our meddling in nations overseas to sometimes disastrous effects, but he clearly has something against western civilization in the abstract, too.

Well, I'm not the one who confused the ability to empathize and rationally examine the actions of others with masochism, which is what I originally asked about. That that was your first association says a lot more about you than it does about me, friend.

But there there. You're very smart. You can do it!

not an argument

We all know there is no shortage of people willing to defend the State no matter , so why do you care that some people criticise it?

Holy shit. First using Sigmund "everything is mummy's fault" Freud to perform the most mad mental gymnastics to talk shit about people who don't share your blind Nationalist tendencies and then this post.
Take the fedora off, I think it's seriously affecting your capacity for critical thought.

Because the people who defend the state are largely those without power. Those who criticize are largely those with power.

creasing here

this has to be brit

What are you on about mate? Do you have a shred of evidence to support that? Don't you think people in power would have a vested interest in supporting the status quo?

Wait are you OP?
Sorry if I misattributed you. I was trying to point out OP's agenda.

The status quo is bourgeois internationalism. The status quo is that wars across the world are fine, while using the military to guard your own borders and only let people in when it's beneficial for your nation is racism. Case in point:

youtube.com/watch?v=_Rcc7xgD2dM

But Chompsky doesn't say any of that. He says Westerners should, not that his people should.

The most commonly used and accepted term for the status quo is capitalism.

>Magians are our enemies

Maybe.

>The most commonly used and accepted term for the status quo is capitalism.
Then call it capitalism. Capitalism is at war with the state, and capitalism is winning. It's now fashionable to call for the erasure of borders and to dismiss the value of any culture beyond GDP.

It's often justified to the masses with talk about colonialism and historical atrocities and appeals to being virtuous, even self-destructively virtuous.

It's considered enlightened because intellectuals do it and what intellectuals do is considered enlightened.

It's a fad, it'll pass as long as people keep pointing out how retarded it is.

Blame yourself for everything and blaming everyone else for everything are two sides of the same mentally I'll coin. Neither is "easier" than the other.and certainly not morally superior.

Academia is mentally ill and in need of a systemic enema.

>You can't do anything about others,

YES YOU CAN

YOU CAN FUCKING KILL THEM

Neocons please go, your time was last decade

What, Obama isn't a neocon? Hillary isn't? Merkel isn't? David Cameron isn't? What the fuck are you on about?

Killing others isn't restricted only to being in perpetual wars overseas, anyways, so your posts is retarded twice over.

>Those in power criticize the State
Are you serious?

The Left is a political ideology of peace

Please do not oppress us with your bigotry

It's almost like the state is subservient to globalist corporate interests or something, and isn't actually the most powerful entity or whatever, and those who run the state are financed by these same globalist corporate interests.

Weird as fuck, right?

The political spectrum forms in a circle. The auto-censorship of the left will meet the political censorship of the right.

Fascism is alive and well and will always be. We are reaching a time where democracy and center/neutral will be a radical position.

Being a-political is impossible. The only option is a "meta-political" one.

death to the pretenders

Because you can't reasonably take responsibility for all the good in the world without also accepting responsibility for at least some of the bad.

college freshman Nietzsche fanboy detected

If the state is subservient to "globalist corporate interests", then criticizing the state = criticizing "globalist corporate interests". So I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

>le horseshoe meme

>If the state is subservient to "globalist corporate interests", then criticizing the state = criticizing "globalist corporate interests". So I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
So when Angela Merkel throws her own nation's flag away in disgust, she's really sticking it to the multinational corporations? How the fuck does that work?

>Because you can't reasonably take responsibility for all the good in the world without also accepting responsibility for at least some of the bad.

Sorry not sorry i haven't contributed to the growth of islam

>Sorry not sorry i haven't contributed to the growth of islam

If you're a U.S. taxpayer, you are indirectly responsible for contributing to the rise of Salafism purely through the fact your nation's military acts as a glorified bodyguard to the nation that funds Salafism.

> Because you can't reasonably take responsibility for all the good in the world without also accepting responsibility for at least some of the bad.
Except it's gotten to the point where we're not even allowed to take responsibility for the good in the first place.

>paying taxes
>being a dumb prole

??

>Because you can't reasonably take responsibility for all the good in the world without also accepting responsibility for at least some of the bad.
Notice how this masochistic tripe is always founded in arguments from virtue, never arguments from pragmatism or benefit? You have to be the 'better person', not the person who ultimately wants what's best for your people or the working class, or whoever you should most reasonably care about most.

cognitive dissonance douchebaggery and memes

>I want the right to do x
>Therefore i adhere with the principle that everyone has the right to do x
>and criticize anyone who doesn't adhere to x because its an attack also towards myself
>Since only civilized countries are disconnected enough to believe in x you get the idea
>What you don't want to have rights?
>Where are the limits?
>o its forbidden to talk about that

I want infinity to be infinity because i might be able into infinity

Although this is always enforced from the top down because its useful and profitable who knows how it would develop naturally

unless you consider all subsets of humanity to be part of a single group enveloped by nature of course

>he clearly has something against western civilization in the abstract, too.
The slobbering over the cock of Authoritarianism. I don't think it's unique to Western civ, only that he's trying to get his own house in order. He has plenty of criticism for Saudi Arabia as a malign force in the Middle East.

Read lots of Chomsky and you will see that he does not like the idea of 'bottom down' hierarchies or oligarchies dictating the direction of society. He is basically an anarchist, though I hate to use that word because most people really misunderstand it. Power ('true power') has shifted to corporations for example because it is always easier to operate where there it is murkier, out of direct control ('democratic' governments are held to high standards, democracy implies accountability, etc).

If Angela Merkel is criticizing the state, she is criticizing the globalist corporate interests.

If you have a non-meme moral philosophy, virtue and pragmatism are the same thing.

>If Angela Merkel is criticizing the state, she is criticizing the globalist corporate interests.
An assertion isn't an argument, you know that, right?

As a German, I truly do not think Merkel cares what multinational corporations are doing. She's certainly disgusted by nationalism, but you have to remember the generation she's from. Germans suffer hard from cultural cringe. First Nazis, then (in her case) commies. Not hard to understand why she thinks the flag is embarrassing. (I really dislike her I should mention, since I don't think it's obvious. Besides, she's CDU. She wouldn't be forging ahead with TTIP if she cared about checking the power of multinational corporations.

So then you claim that the state actually does not represent globalist corporate interests? If the state is controlled by globalists, and you criticize what the state does, you're criticizing the actions of the globalists.

>It's an "Alt-Right complaining" thread

Are you being paid to regurgitate the beliefs of others on cue?

He seems skeptical about it, which makes you seem genuinely touchy about it.

Why is everyone here so emotionally involved in what a popular contrarian intellectual has to say? Why is it taken as a personal insult when it's assumed that we might not be the perfect freedom angels?

I'm claiming that Merkel isn't thinking of globalist corporate interests when she throws her flag away in disgust. She's thinking of the same thing she's thinking of when she asks Mark Zuckerberg to help her in censoring conversations on Facebook: Curbing nationalism.

Its actually easier in our current human culture to blame others than to accept responsibilities.

To do the opposite takes bit of mental gymnastics. However I'd agree that in some sense, laying all the blame on yourself instead of other creates an issue.

We have a responsibility as each individual to forge our own thoughts/actions/habits/beliefs/etc. Our sphere of influence is limited in a sense. Thus blaming myself for things that are beyond your sphere of influence is bit too retarded. However at the same time, if the cause was your ancestor, then I'd lay the blame to them.

You could say "MIGHT IS RIGHT" then this would defeat the entire realm of Law/Order/Morals. Then this thread becomes meaningless.

No, the suckers do it for free. That's what happens when you get cucked by a leather shoe with some hay on top.

It's so fucking cringey when the left tries to sound cool and alt-right.

That's because they're doing a good job of impersonating the alt-right.

an ok post

What are some opinions, thoughts, views, humans etc. YOU would consider enlightened

youtube.com/watch?v=Ele_dj3ud38

Somebody just discovered Nietzsche and is using it to justify all his whining and bitching. Here's a tip: what doesn't kill me makes me stronger, if you're so confident about the values of your culture go out and meet those who "attack it" head on, show how much stronger your values are.

Faith, Family, Strength, Loyalty, Security, Prosperity, Discipline, Purity.

Because Soviet subversion in the American academy worked.

But you'd betray your family for your nation, right?

Obedience to a nation is implied by every part of that but family.

Which is more important? Family or nation?

Then why would you be masochistic and criticize yourself while defending others?
Similarly. Why defend yourself and criticize others?

Like you said, the lens needs to be consistent.

>youtube.com/watch?v=kbL5L4r4Ars
Do americans really think and act like this?

Just as American subversion in the Soviet system worked.

>examine your own actions with the same lens you examine others actions
Then pretty clearly the people who op's talking about aren't enlightened in the least.

Then what is up with faggots that are willingly trying to get their own culture killed while defending it's merits?

Or the fags that pretend that progressivism doesn't come from western values.

Like Chomsky? Yeah some leftist cunts do.

>Strength, Loyalty, Security, Prosperity, Discipline
i like those

faith is okay too, unless you subscribe to the meme religions,

explain about purity, in what sense do you mention it

>US should get out
>we do
>Iraq get ISIS'd

kek

>Then what is up with faggots that are willingly trying to get their own culture killed while defending it's merits?
They're not, though. It's right-wing propaganda. Pretty telling that the right is so desperate for votes that they feel a need to make up stories about how the left is destroying the West.

Sweden is a fiction of the right, apparently. It doesn't actually exist.

If you try to land a plane there, you'll just crash into the ocean.

Racial purity.

I hear leftists stand up for western values, this includes cosmopolitanism, and they always criticize cultures that reject that value.

I hear rightists criticize foreign values for their origin, not for their quality; they agree with the values.


It's like leftists are trying to clean up the game, and rightists want their team to win no matter what.

>Spooks, Spooks, Spooks, Spooks, Spooks, Spooks, Spooks, Spooks
ftfy.

ISIS is the rape baby caused by the US splooging in to a hellscape in the first place.

t. retard

>I hear leftists stand up for western values, this includes cosmopolitanism, and they always criticize cultures that reject that value.
Leftists are yuppies and stand up for yuppie values that are irrelevant to the poor like cosmopolitanism?

Whoah dude, you're blowing my mind here!

Racial purity is a myth, bro. Any look at haplogroup maps will tell you that. I don't like Muslims either, but the 'purest' groups tend to be the most retrograde. Think of the Khoi-San 'Bushmen' or Sentinalese or Inuit.

But it is actually leftists that talk about the poor a lot more than rightists - wages, social safety nets, health care, education and pretty much everything

cosmopolitanism isn't a leftist value, it's an elitist value independent of 'left' or 'right'. FWIW, there are far more conservative millionaires who are 'cosmopolitans' than leftist professors.

slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything-except-the-outgroup/

Yeah Trump is a good example.

>German father
>Scottish mother
>has kids with a Czech
>then has kids with a Slovenian

>hey, you know, nobody actually wants to do manual labor jobs, right?
>if we import a whole bunch of brown people to do these jobs for really cheap, and those lower working class wages, that's SO great, because it fills up those jobs poor white people don't need AND it fights racism!
So compassionate. Benefiting the 1% and managing to claim the moral highground while doing it.

Left talks about the poor but in fact they're hurting the working class by importing a bunch of 3rd worlders willing to work for pennies. It's no coincidence that the one group that wants open borders the most are capitalist megacorps. Then when the native worker loses his job the leftist intellectuals will laugh at him for being too stupid or uneducated or something, exactly like your le porky capitalist would.

>Power ('true power') has shifted to corporations for example because ....
Because without the discipline of "cock slobbering authoritarians" (mild and open to discussion conservatism) society is dragged through the cracks and then exploited. Its the left that were pushing sex drugs and rock and roll onto already vulnerable working classes and destabilization of society, NOT of "the 1%". They are good boy and girls now aren't they. Don't go after those that make life chaos and feed off it, go after order and structure itself.

Power didn't shift to corporations. There wouldn't be diversity consultants job if it had.

How can you guys be so similar, repeating the exactly same opinions, it's funny as fuck.

It's literally the left that talks about the 1% and raising taxes on them, and as I told you before it's the leftists that want the minimum wage to be higher
I give you concrete examples of policies you reply with meme arrows.

>brown people are taking jobs for cheap
this wouldn't happen if the government enforced wages better and regulated where it should.

Brown people aren't being imported really. The laws permit people to gain visas and work abroad.

Finally, given a sloppy government, how is it not the companies' fault that they are willing to illegaly hire people for pennies and throw out their faithful workers?

You froth over a few Mexican gardeners while industrialists giggle at moving operations to China, and pop another champagne to celebrate the increased dividends. Mexicans aren't stealing jobs, they're mopping up the scraps. People like Trump are laughing all the way to the bank.

OMG, not sex drugs and rock and roll?! Anyway the left wasn't pushing any of this, it was just more passive about it, because it did not put arbitrary power on a pedestal. The structure is rotten and self-serving, it's clearly not worth saving.

But it is the companies' fault and it's the left's fault even more considering they sold out to the fat cats and betrayed their own electorate. Look at how many prominent Democrats are shilling for the TPP (including Obama and Hillary, until she was called out on it and had to backpedal) and other nonsense that will royally arsefuck the the workers while giving all power to the capitalists.

If you are an American left leaning voter and you HAVE to choose between Trump and Hillary, you just have to go with Trump. Not saying he's the ideal pick, far from it, but much preferable to Hillary.

...

>You froth over a few Mexican gardeners while industrialists giggle at moving operations to China

Yeah and the TPP that the Democrat elites want to implement will move even more manufacturing to China and Mexico, good job you fucking retards.

>Mexicans aren't stealing jobs, they're mopping up the scraps.

They factually are stealing jobs.

>examine your own actions

Except his not, he's specifically blaming the US government. Meanwhile he will bend over backwards to justify his own actions such as his whitewashing of pol pot.

>How can you guys be so similar, repeating the exactly same opinions, it's funny as fuck.
Because it's a glaring flaw in the 'the left loves the poor meme' that's obvious enough everyone who doesn't live in a yuppie bubble can see it. Being right doesn't always equate to being novel, retard.

>Finally, given a sloppy government, how is it not the companies' fault that they are willing to illegaly hire people for pennies and throw out their faithful workers?
Who said it wasn't the companies' fault? The left is taking their side, plain and simple, all because it's an issue where not taking their side has connotations of being 'racist'.

Genuinely wondering now and answer truthfully, are you even poor or are you yet another patronizing middle class sheltered cunt?

obama and hillary aren't leftists
>The left is taking their side
by advocating they pay higher wages to people, regardless of their origin OR by advocating higher taxes and more regulation on capitalism

facts aren't on your side

i am eastern european

Which country? And that doesn't answer my question, not everyone in Eastern Europe is poor.

>by advocating they pay higher wages to people, regardless of their origin OR by advocating higher taxes and more regulation on capitalism
By advocating for high rates of immigration in countries that already have big problems with unemployment, especially youth unemployment. Exactly what I fucking said, moron.

>Which country
bulgaria

how about you, where are you from? are you poor?

We can rely on Republicans to vote against it?

>still didn't answer the question about his economic stratum
Confirmed for yuppie scum lecturing the poor on what does and doesn't affect them and how compassionate he is, good job. :^)

US and yes.

Trump is vehemently against it.