What are some other good modern philosophers that are sure to leave their mark in history?

What about Styxhexhenhammer666 and Richard Spencer? Are they any good?

"Stormfags" don't support him, we think he's a literal cuckold and a leftist faggot.

Worthless both of them.

>trips of falsehood

Holy shit the mental gymnastics.

Hmm I wonder what kind of reaction OP is expecting from this thread...

Styx is only good if you want to learn more about the occult.

Since this is Veeky Forums, I recommend Victor Davis Hanson. He's one of the foremost historians of Greek history.

youtube.com/watch?v=pzXJi9-1SUs
@44:00
>If he does what I suggested-- that is not my idea, but if he's true to these promises to these voters--he will win. And it's going to change the Republican Party if he gets re-elected. It already has changed. The Republican Party is now a more populous party, and it's a more empathetic party, I think. And I like this idea that nobody knows who to listen to anymore. I like the idea that writers at the Wall Street Journal, National Review, or Weekly Standard or Comey are not gospel. That there are people coming in online. It's just a free for all. There's no hierarchy anymore. I think this is much more healthy than this geriatric cadre that runs the Democratic Party or Hollywood--intolerant and almost Stalinist.

Woah, watch out, smart guy over here

>What are some other good modern philosophers
Viper the Rapper
Lil B

>CLEAN
>YOUR
>ROOM
Okay reddit.

I remember that Styxhexhenhammer666 dude, when people did Nazi salutes at one of Richard Spencer's speaking engagements he decided to white knight saying they were doing the Roman Salute.

I think he's pretty useful at redpilling people desu

Not the guy you responded to, but I think Dave Rubin probably has a larger audience.

...

>feminists are dumb lmao
If you needed to be redpilled to know this you're dumber than shit

Everything else aside, it's a pretty good photo.

I'm not going to watch some fucking leaf tell me about self-actualization like I need a therapist. Oh my god, Jordan Peterson is so enlightened, he told me to make my bed. Holy shit come on, pull your ass up by your bootstraps, the fuck are you doing? Heck I have no problem with Peterson making money and people listening to him speak, but there's a point where it gets a little bit much. When you're making 70 grand on patreon a month and then on top of that, you want to charge $10 to do a women's magazine personality quiz and give idiots their result. Hey, answer this 100 questions and I'll tell you what personality type you are! Do you know how many of those quizzes exist for free? Why would you pay for one? Why do you need somebody to tell you who you are, you should know what you are. How lost in life are you that you need to pay another person to tell you who you are. You fucking know who you are, you don't need somebody to tell you to make your bed, and get a job, and have a normal sane relationship, that's common sense shit. There, I just saved you 10 dollars.

Why is it when we talk about videogames, like EA right, when we talk about EA and we say, "Ok, you can charge $60 for a product, that's okay, that's capitalism" But then we look at the microtransactions and lootboxes and think "well they're just being assholes, they're just trying to jew us out of our money". That's a bridge too far, they're just money-hungry. Why is it ok to say that about EA but not Jordan Peterson? How is that not the same fucking thing? I have no problem with Jordan being a capitalist but much like EA with lootboxes and microtransactions, charging $10 for a personality quiz is kind of a scummy thing.

>Styx is only good if you want to learn more about the occult.
Or if you're really in the mood for Come Sail Away

There are no notable philosophers in our time.
And none will be as famous as the old greeks or the 19th century ones.

Well I mean there's Chomsky, as much as I don't agree with him.

Probably Jordan Peterson, Lauren Southern and Paul Joseph Watson. Everyone else is pleb tier

None of them get nearly as much attention in serious circles as Sargon of Akkad.

Communist "philosophers" are simply braindead demagogues.

>One of the great kings of Mesopotamia name is now synonymous with, if not overshadowed by Benjamin's usage of it and in future all information on Sargon of Akkad will be about Carl Benjamin and the real one will go down as just a nobody
Truly the greatest

Why does he do that gay fake laugh?

>fuck the poor
>trump
>bad policies
Trump sounds like a retarded jackass but his policies help the poor.
He's eh, but he's not a philosopher
>Paul Joseph Watson
You'll get a more insightful world view from a drunk 50 year old deadbeat in Serbia that's drinking beer in front of the store
t. Serb

Feminism is the actual "redpill", and I think the general moral character of people on /r9k/ and /pol/ only reinforces this fact. The people that scream loudest about modern sexism/racism not being a problem are, surprise surprise, usually raving lunatics who will freely admit they want to rape and kill people in an anonymous environment. Carl is a dyed in the wool conspiracy theorist retard, basically a diet Roosh V.

Knowing how shit he's at doing research I woulnd't count on it.

Feminism isn't THE problem, women are. People who blame feminism but can't name the real elephant in the room, women, are like those fence sitters who say "zionist" because they're too pussy to bame the Jews.
The reality is that saying women are corrupted by feminism is like saying saying botlfy larvae are corrupted by metamorphosis - feminism is simply femininity in its pure, mature form. They can't be corrupted as they themselves are the corruption, and men are oblivious to this simple, easily observable fact because most men are enslaved and innately programmed by billions of years of female sexual selection to always protect and never harm the woman. The average man is for lack of better words a domesticated serf, a bio-android serving his class of cunt masters.

You've totally nailed it user. He could at least feign some sort of credibility and scruple by simply "subsisting" off of his (ill-achieved) 70G/month. But he betrays the lineage of his "profession" when he starts charging for pop-psych personality quizes -- anyone for snake oil?

He's audience is shrinking and he's running out of things to say.

Give it four years and he's in obscurity like the rest of the vlogs before him.

>Dude Trump is like Caesar and Gaius Marius
truly the modern intellectual

You've been memed out of your mind by the Titanic, dude. Women got raped and killed in history like anybody else. If anything I'd say that men in the past were even less protective of them. Nobody gave a shit about what a grown man did behind closed doors, it was considered incredibly nosy to interfere with domestic violence, even though the act itself was frowned upon. Marital rape was legal for 99% of history, too (federally, until 1993 in the USA)

>>If anything I'd say that men in the past were even less protective of them
>keeps women away from combat as much as possible while sending millions of millions of men to die at war
I know you're baiting but come on.

>millions of men in premodern warfare

Not common. Besides, most fighters in the middle ages were mercenaries and nobles anyway. There was by and large no draft. Romans used levies but towards the end of the empire paying off the government was more common to maintain citizenship than military service.

Why should women have been fighting in wars anyway? Childbirth was arguably just as bad or even deadlier, and it's not like they typically had the freedom to avoid it. Women would fight defensively in sieges, but were barred from most military service without a choice, and military service was one of the few ways to ascend the social ladder at all.

okay soyboys, keep buying into the mainstream meteor

Think of men as appliances, or tools. We're the calculators, the pneumatic drills, the cars, the vacuum cleaners. We were designed to make female lives more comfortable. Women are weaker than men because men were designed to do the work. Women are less smart because they don't NEED to be smart, they have men to do the thinking and planning for them. Does that make men superior? Hardly. Is a calculator superior to you because it can calculate faster than your brain? It isn't, since you're still the one controlling the calculator. You're its master, lest it somehow gains autonomy and refuses to take orders from you.
Now since no design is perfect, you'll get malfunctioning models from time to time. Models that don't have the firmware protecting their owner, and models that even actively harm them. This how you get the Ted Bundys, Ed Kempers, Andrei Chikatilos of the world. They don't have the slave instict encoded in their DNA. They're the exploding calculators in your hand.
And we are indeed slaves, we were designed to be slaves, toiling for female convenience and getting a tingle in our bellies when the cunt master praises us. It's natural. And there is no whore more abhorrent and detestable than Mother Nature.

...

>Women are weaker than men because men were designed to do the work.

In middle class 50s America, maybe. Women did similar agricultural labor to men for most of written history.

Are people actually considering Sargon of Akkad and Jordan Peterson philosophers or I'm being baited?

No. They spent their sweet time screwing around pretending to work, performing easy activities like splitting wood or cleaning vegetables while the nen toiled like worker ants. It's like equating a modern corporate secretary to a modern construction worker. If women labored the same way men did historically we'd have very little sexual dimorphism when it comes to muscle mass and bone density which is obviously not the case.

Food preservation was extremely labor intensive and monotonous before modern refrigerators, same with weaving before industrial textiles. Child rearing isn't exactly stressless, either. I can guarantee you most cultures spent more time doing shit like pickling than actually harvesting or gathering food. Even kids did hard work at a much earlier age, and contrary to popular conceptions, pre-neolithic labour was generally much less segregated and divided than today.

It varies by culture, though. In some tribes, men did almost no work at all, especially among certain groups of native Americans. Granted, they were often embroiled in endemic warfare, but it was very honor bound and low casualty for the most part until serious tensions broke out. "Male disposability" also varies by region. Saving elders first and letting young girls starve in times of famine was not uncommon in Africa, and most cultures have higher rates of female infanticide than male infanticide even today, because male children inherit more wealth and have higher economic value. You only have to look at the gender ratios in India and China to see that this is a problem.

Not in the renaissance.

Modern day family farmer here. My sister and mother always did pretty heavy work, we lifted shit together, carried wood, pulled dead cow bodies together, etc.
If you have a small family farm, like the peasants of the old, you simply can't afford to leave the women out of it. Sure, we assigned the lighter work to them and left the heavist work to ourselves, but that didn't mean the women weren't tough as fuck.

Can confirm. My grandma was a dairy farmer and used to be strong as shit. Rural lifestyles breed hard men and women in general.

...

>post count doesn't go up

Don't forget
>Corbyn is going to lose so badly you guys coz he is such a commie. Haha it is a suicide pact! I am still a liberal though :^)
>I bet 100 seats lost you guys
>Polls? Fuck the polls man
>Oh no! Theresa May made me wrong, it was all her fault that I am wrong. How could you lose to Corbyn?

Where do you think you are?

>Could
>You
>Not
>Summarize
>This
>In
>Under
>5
>Minutes?

>nobody can possibly make more than one post in a thread that inspires contentious arguments unless they're sanefagging

I fear for the later generations.

jim posting?

>Lauren Southern and Paul Joseph Watson
No.

>his actual political views align perfectly with pre-Corbyn Labour
>constantly shits on Labour supporters who are anti-Corbyn