How dangerous are some books?

stunning groupthink, /plit/

"There are books which have an inverse value for the soul and the health according as the inferior soul and the lower vitality, or the higher and more powerful, make use of them. In the former case they are dangerous, disturbing, unsettling books, in the latter case they are herald-calls which summon the bravest to THEIR bravery. Books for the general reader are always ill-smelling books, the odour of paltry people clings to them. "

The Codex Seriphinianus (I think) is being reprinted soon, look it up.

Slippery slope fallacy.

Back to /pol/ please, that might work better there.

it would have happened one way or another, notions like racism are usually more ingrained than that. those ideas probably stem from his childhood or society and were only reinforced by the book, or maybe it was the first time his thoughts were expressed so concretely and convincingly,

people don't believe the bible just on a whim

That is not necessarily true. Racism as much as any other fanatical thought is learned. A book, of any kind, only allows the fanatic more ammunition. Sometimes, a book can push someone further down the path of fanaticism, but only if that someone has allowed themselves to think of it as truth.

Racism and other exaggerations are often called identity politics.

It's called identity politics because for the racist or cultural Marxist or mysognist or radical feminist, their identity resides in some kind of stupid belief, and they've been taught that way, indirectly or purposefully.

Like every other thing in the world, the quick and simple fix is to actually experience things open mindedly. People often lack the intellect or means to do so, and so you have all kinds of madmen around.

The intelligent person believes in himself but isn't ever sure. A stupid person has decided they were right before they picked up any book or talked to any person, and they'll think they are right until they get information thier biased world view accepts, or they are challenged by who they consider authority to change their opinion.

The authority of a racist is a racist leader or someone who is "tough'

The authority of an SJW is a prominent activist or a minority for example

Just my thoughts

Yes, he merely came to hold these opinions through a fatalistic mechanism of animal behavioral learning, there is no way he could have reached these beliefs independently and rationally, p-please
t. OP

Get over yourself.

Who gives a fuck about Nietzsche's stupid pussy-asshole bullshit? How sensitive do you have to be to think that books are dangerous? If people are idiots naturally, they'll find whatever they can to support their opinions and be easily taken in by whatever bullshit, books or no books.

i just said that seeing certain works as "corruptive" is a sign of authoritarian thinking.
It shows how OP sees works that he disagrees with as fundamentally evil, without offering any clear argument other than his own personal moral viewpoint. From that he makes universal judgements. Thats quite authoritarian.

I get why you said that I used a fallacious argument, I know. It was a rhetorical device. Make of that as you will.

>Racism is learned
In-group preference is biological. Cuckolded anti-racism is the learned behavior.

...

>Racism as much as any other fanatical thought is learned

as applied to political systems maybe, but it's been shown that even infants are biased in favor of the race of their parents. So at least some amount of racial prejudice is a natural consequence of being raised by one's biological parents.

>It's called identity politics because for the racist or cultural Marxist or mysognist or radical feminist

oh fuck me, i just responded to Sargon of Akkad

reductio at /pol/ is a fallacy too.

>a right wing Christian nationalist who wants racial purity.
>had a couple of black girlfriends

Either this guy is going through a black comedy level identity crisis or this is a bait. I'd say bait.

>"how dangerous are books?"
>he hasn't read Don Quixote
>"hey Veeky Forums real quick answer the question which provided the premise of one of the world's earliest and most cherished and most revisited novels"
>laughinggirls.jpg

>sex better marriage

What did he mean by this?

Trotsky popularized its use, as did Mao, for political purposes. It was one of Mao's magic words to shut down debate. You're "racist", "capitalist", "counter-revolutionary", etc.

>he used to be a pretty intelligent
but
>Now he's against immigration, abortion

Only intelligent people support abortion and mass immigration/ demographic replacement? I'm sorry to say this, lad, but you seem to live up your own arse. These are personal beliefs and there is no use trying to treat them as a question of education. Abortion is not a truth or good that has been revealed by scientific investigation, your idea of "educated beliefs" are simply the beliefs that you have been indoctrinated into yourself, probably in higher education. These ideas specifically are a materialistic leftism and scientism.

You may believe that there is nothing wrong a ~10% indigenous population in some parts of London. You may not care if babies are aborted, you may hate and despise your own country -- you might even be ashamed of your country. 'National pride, religion, and conservatism is for morons. Lets tear down everything around us because we are "enlightened"'. Do you really think you're new in thinking this?

You have to realise that your beliefs have consequences. Your friend is trying to find his place in the world. If you're anything like the other vapid undergraduates here, you're probably some edgy leftist nihilist.

Edgy progressives have destroyed the traditions and customs of Western Europe without even asking the people affected. Decent, ordinary people have had their whole communities destroyed, when they complain you call them "racist", "bigoted", "stupid" etc. You just don't get that society *needs* myth and tradition in order to survive.

You are just another fucking pseud with your phony outrage, shallow emotions, and stolen platitudes. The words "chill guy" really just show your facetiousness. If being "chill" is acting like a little nihilistic poser then // F U C K // Y O U //

Yes I'm triggered. I'm sick of all these fucking teenage pseuds and Reddit/Tumblr tier posts over the past few years. This is IT now. Veeky Forums has totally gone to shit. Fuck off back to your safe space, kiddo.

Lol typo, before marriage.

Your buttmadness pleases me.

I love the buttmad because I recognize a little bit of myself in it too.
Godbless you

dam u mad... lol... :^)

>Evola
>Christian
pick one

Also,

>wanting to murder babies and accept Muslim invaders en masse

Not OP but you sound pretty stupid.

Preference isn't racism. Everyone has racial preference. Racism is the active and obsessive need to go out of your way to bitch and moan about the blacks.

>Edgy progressives have destroyed the traditions and customs of Western Europe

>Edgy progressives have destroyed the traditions and customs of Western Europe

Yes, progressivism in the form of liberalism and capitalism did that, and neo-liberalism even further. There is no place for old tradition and customs in the modern economic world. But the people who support this aren't the left now, not the progressives. They are the conservatives.

No one gives a shit about your shitty traditions.

>~10% indigenous population in some parts of London
>traditions and customs of Western Europe
>Being this wilfully ignorant.

Books are simply a vehicle for information. Don't kill the messenger.

>its a "baselessly redefines the meaning of a word to suit his particular point" post

>To my dismay he has become a right wing Christian nationalist who wants racial purity
Why to your dismay?

not an argument for mass immigration, abortion, or atheism

just to let you know, you're agreeing with him

He's direly misread Evola if he became a racist. You have to be a retard to become a fascist from reading him.

Because all of that is a regression to unreason, hatred, and fear.

As if you made an argument, dumbass.

Well there are certainly many fascists and neo Nazis that read his crap. It's labeled as a very anti-egalitarian anti-humanist work. So right wing whackos draw from it.

Hatred and fear are healthy, natural emotions. Throwing open your borders to millions of people who venerate a child-fucking warlord is, I would argue, a bit more disastrous than anything your friend feels.

Reason is an evil, hatred is inherently un-Christian so you seem to be confused on that end, and Christianity is the religion of fear and its converse.

>I'm a basic bitch and I'm just oh-so appalled by my friend's blossoming
>like eww gross, widespread opinions people had up until 30 years ago i like can't even, im so shocked!

Wow you sound like a fag, do you only interact with likeminded twenty-somethings? Probably.

Many fascists and neo-nazis just know Evola was part of the "traditionalist" movement so they latch on to some of his critiques of modernity without keeping the moral base he's coming from.

An Evolan would make a critique of the modern world as being degenerate due to its misalignment with what is Hyperborean, not because ROASTIES ARE FUCKING TYRONE REEEEE GAS THE KIKES RACE WAR NOW

Lol, that makes sense.

Kk

>mass immigration
drives communities apart, imports radicalized elements that pose an actual threat of terrorism

>abortion
You are terminating a life. It's murder.

>atheism
I'll leave that to Aquinas

>right wing whackos

>anti-egalitarian
Funny how the the fascist Falange de las JONS promoted social justice long before those progressive shits did.

That's a misleading thing to say. Fascists didn't reject modernity, they rather wanted an alternative to the cosmopolitan view capitalists and Marxists had of modernism.

>Kk
are you 12

The fascist ideal is a man of action, by nature it sets out to seize back and mold the world to its liking. It's fully possible for someone to grasp an Evola text and, instead of writing an impotent academic critique about Hyperboreans, feel energized in the conviction that the current world is vapid and directionless. Kikes and roasties as you call them are a common boogeyman and negative sentiments about them are especially common amongst less sophisticated people but that doesn't acquit them of what they are accused.

It says everything that Evola himself was supportive of right-wing movements. I think you're either trying to sanitize him because he's a monolith and you don't want to believe reactionary politics may have some basis outside of reflexive hatred.

>infinite regress is like totally impossible guys
okay

Uh... But that's not actually about anything, is it? Or have I missed something?

No, that's only if you're a racist. Immigration spurs economic growth and innovatuon. Immigrants also commit less crimes, work harder for less pay, and do jobs no one else wants.

Terminating life does not equal murder. Killing a person is murder. A fetus is not a person.

I'll leave that to almost any other philosopher who cared to talk about god.

>Obsessive need

Stop obsessively pointing out that all these immigrants are rapists :^)

It's gross
It's learned behavior
Haver you been reading evola?

>Immigrants also commit less crimes, work harder for less pay, and do jobs no one else wants.
jesus fucking christ
pure ideology

>Immigrants also commit less crimes
quantifiably untrue in numerous circumstances. immigrant populations like the arabs in europe or mexicans in the U.S. are responsible for a disproportionate amount of crime, especially violent crime - rates of crime being higher among the immigrant population than among natives.

>work harder for less pay
you mean are exploited by opportunistic employers? which not only defrauds the immigrant workers, but prevents locals from being able to compete in the jobs market.

>do jobs no one else wants
complete bullshit, a retroactive justification. there are so many people who want jobs and can't find them, only a complete sheltered faggot could really believe this rhetoric.

>You are terminating a life. It's murder.

potential vs actual. a fetus cannot live by itself

>counters ideology with ideology

nice

neither can babby
stupid measure of morality

equivocation fallacy. a baby can live by itself, as it can be alive without being directly connected to the mother, even if it can't provide for itself. a fetus can't.

Books are dangerous to some people only. Basically it's the effect it has on the individual person. For example, I can read a bible and think nothing of it. Another person can do that and think they should go stone a witch.

But such extremes aside I think books can be negative to a degree. On a personal note I have picked up some books from a Veeky Forums recommendation for depressed people, namely No Longer Human and the Book Of Disquiet. While they helped to make me see my feelings are not uncommon amongst others it also made me border on tears.

>ideology
Pure ideology

>crime
Absolutely false. Immigrants are far less likely to commit crime, do some research. And think logically, they just escaped hell holes, all they want is to work hard and survive.

>defraud
No I mean picking berries for 14 hours a day in the sun for less than min wage so we can eat cheap food, and no American would ever do that job.

Also, we don't need more jobs kid. We could all be working 15 hours a day and we'd still have plenty. Most work is bullshit.

>jobs
Pure ideology

Right, some things in the right frame of mind can be harmful. Even a conversation can be harmful if a person pries your weaknesses open and attacks your sore sports. Books can do the same.

He just really took to the idea of the Social Machine. To a point where he sees that a particular class of people hinder that, and others help it. He's taking note of sacrifices that are necessary in life so you don't have to live in fear, but in comfort everyday.
I don't agree with him. I believe with, how the upper management of our society is handling things, that other cultures and ethnicities are integrating. He knows that through this, his own power in our world is decreasing because white men had, and still have, more power than most other people in the world. The lower 70% of the U.S. population's pittance of an income is actually quite wealthy to much of the rest of the world.
So I really disagree with him; but my point is you need to know where he's coming from, and not say he's unintelligent because of his opinions. I'm sure he came to his ideals in a thoughtful way. Not all similar understandings lead to similar conclusions.

...Ahem... I mean
Your the ignorant one fag

God bless you.

That's not an unreasonable assesment. I've always known him to be quite thoughtful.

There is vertainly an element of fear there. I think ironically fear undergrads all righy wig extremism (fear of being weak, fear of not knowing ) so they seek out those who offer truth and strength, even if it's all lies.

Idont know how to reach him really, even if I understand.

The Marvel Studios fandom is full of generic cunts who try to seem quirky and unique by identifying heavily with a slightly offbeat fandom such as the Marvel Cinematic Universe "But wait, that's actually incredibly mainstream and not offbeat at all!" you say. And you're right. But actual offbeat things don't give as much 'nerd' cred, and these things have more creative value than reality TV so people on Tumblr can make posts such as "Why are all girls nowadays such idiots who watch Jersey Shore? I'm very unique because I like nerdy intelligent stuff like Iron Man 3, and I like quirky men like Tom Hiddleston and Mark Ruffalo teehee, look at this repeating gif of 0.5 seconds of Loki doing a thing with his face and a theory about how all the Marvel movies are connected and Thanos is going to collect all the Infinity Gems except in the movies none of them are really "gems" at all and here is some fanart of all the Avengers gender swapped and with less sexist costumes and they all have the exact same fucking face with that bulbous red nose also did you know that I am a girl who likes superheroes I know it's hard to believe but it is true I AM AN AVENGERS look at this gif of Tony Stark raising his eyebrow, anyway The Avengers is sexist because Black Widow's costume is too tight and unrealistic for a special agent so here is a redesign of her in figure hiding combat fatigues because I am progressive. Does anyone else think that Hulk and Iron Man would make a good couple? TEE HEE I LOVE GAYS BECAUSE I AM SO TOTALLY NOT HOMOPHOBIC EVEN THOUGH I TREAT GAYS AS AN AMUSING NOVELTY Rocket Racoon for president!"

>He's against abortion
THE HORROR

Have you seen what outlawing abortion did in Romania?

Yes, horror.

Evola wasn't a Christian or nationalist. How about you actually read him?

Abortion itself is horrible in principle though. What happened in Romania?

Try leaving a baby alone for a week in the middle of a forest and tell me how well it gets on.

>current year
>still believing slippery slope is a fallacy

Prepare for the amount of ayy lmao spooked and cultural and moral relativist sophistry which hasn't seen the light of day since Socrates railed against them.

As far as OP goes:
If you believe that books can corrupt you must believe that there are books that hold truths. You must have a judgment on what makes books morally good and what books do not. How do you come to this assumption on good versus evil? How is that which your friend seems to connect with morally corrupt?

If you can debunk that then I will agree with you, if you merely disagree with him because it does not conform to your ideas and worldview you must realize how far into the abyss you have stared.

The hero we need.

Screencapping for when OP or some other lefty decides to shitpost another time, thanks lad.

The large consensus of Europeans gives a 'shit about the traditions and customs of Western Europe' no matter how excessively our generation wants to pride themselfs on attacking the foundations of Europe.

If we can both agree that the traditions and customs of Western Europe can be traced back to a time all the way to Ancient Greece, and, at least, up until the France Revolution, we can say that there are several traditions and customs we hold dear in the West which tend to be absent in other continents and cultures.

In this I refer to Solon's laws, Roman law, and ofcourse Le droite de l'homme et du citoyen which constitutionalized our dearly held beliefs, customs and traditions we upheld through generations

Now if foreign forces invade and disrupt our constitutions, wouldn't you say they go against our traditions and customs? I can already feel your mind ticking as I say this, as you prepare to turn the argument against me for putting restrictions on liberty so natural to Europeans.

However, there must be a point where Christian herd like mentality disintegrates from being a pathological nicety to something that destroys the very foundations of that which it prides itself upon, namely liberty and tolerance. What will man do when turning the other cheek turns to an end of liberty, equality and fraternity? What will it take before we confront evil, instead of wallowing in masochism and pity to those who have opaqued hopes for a bright future.

>How dangerous are some books?

Gutenberg started a fuckton of wars/revolutions because suddenly all these peasants can get their own Bibles and hey guess what: Jesus didn't actually say you were supposed to obey your master no matter what.

Killing a mass of cells isn't horrible. It created an entire generation of poor, malnourished, unloved, drug addicted street kids because all the moms that would have had abortions couldn't do it. It was a MASSIVE social failure, and the effects are still felt today.

Just Wikipedia abortion Romania.

Not an argument.

Sure, the judgment is based on a range of science, psychology, history, sociology, ecology, etc. When you analyze views you need a sense to which it improves or harms human floruishing and reduces suffering. Ideas that hold up things like racial purity are scientifically illiterate, and often lead to racist behavior towards peoppe simply based on skin color. It's madness.

Or being a Christian, and then not wanting to help others who are from different faiths or regions. That is not the message of Christ. Give of what you are asked, love others, even your enemies is the way of Christ. And thus you also anaylze the position based on logic.

Evola seems to have that effect on some people. It's quite possible that I would agree with some of his criticisms of modern society, but the answer is not right wing Christian racial purity. That's just neo-Nazism, the weakest and most morally bankrupt way of thought.

This was a pleasure to read.

Well wrote user.

Holy samefagging hamburgers batman!

you're just restating your original point which still remains an equivocation fallacy. try actually responding to what i posted

> (You)
> (You)
> (You)
>
> (You)
>Holy samefagging hamburgers batman!

Try again.

It's not so much books as much as it is easily influenced retards.

Then don't try. Just discuss things outside if or on the cusp of those ideals. It's not like all things in life revolve around religious and socioeconomic views.
Or else humor him and let him talk about it more without so much aggressive judgment. It's easier to explain things when you don't feel like you're being scrutinized but simply having conversation. Agree to disagree often, but civilly. Have an adult relationship, is what I'm saying.

Spot on.

I'll add that these bourgeois-bohemians, who speak so condescending about the proletariat, are exactly the kind of people who either don't have to deal with the effects of globalism, and massive, uncontrolled immigration, or are so culturally nihilistic as to not care.

After the brexit vote, it has been noted with impudence that the enlightened, educated, and youthful voted overwhelming to remain in the EU, implying that those who voted to leave are dumb. This is repeated with nearly every type of social issue, which are usually matters of morality and personal belief -- not intelligence. Personal reflection is apparently not allowed on these topics, either sick with the progressive dogma, or be labeled a dummy. It's unacceptable

>right wing Christian nationalist
>Evola
He didn't read Evola and you didn't either.

>I'll add that these bourgeois-bohemians, who speak so condescending about the proletariat, are exactly the kind of people who either don't have to deal with the effects of globalism, and massive, uncontrolled immigration, or are so culturally nihilistic as to not care.

You're very wrong. Who you're describing generally highly directly benefit from globalization in terms of employment and culture.
The first world "working class" also benefit from sucking the labour out of third worlders as well but in a more abstract round-about way, you can get them to support protectionism until they start feeling the effects of inflation and their cheap electronics stop being cheap and their welfare transfers coming from the profits of financial capital get cut back on.
The truth is all first worlders benefit (directly or indirectly) to much from exploiting immigrants and third world slave labour to ever go back to protectionism and have to actually be directly exploited 14 hours in a factory.

Yes, I do this most of the time. But when someone who once seemed wise, becomes a racist, and your life has been devoted to anti-racism, it is not something you take in a calm demeanor if you have meaningful attachments to black people and your friend.

It's is a stark reminded of the changing forces, the failure of reason, and the rise of ignorance. Now I can talk to him calmly, but when it first happened, and the realization of what has darkened his mind was a fresh, it was jarring.

That is the truth, the entire system is still built on exploitation. But the great irony of modernity is that we pretend things are fair and meritocratic, and all the violence is simply exported to the other.

Did you know that it's possible to be racist without hating black people or blacks as individuals?

If you mean unconscious racism inculcated by a system in which you have sympathetic nervous system arousal around blacks, then yes, most white people are racist.

If you mean that in the typical right wing way, within the nonsense of scientific racism or racial realism, then obviously not, that's the domain of pure idiocy and ignorance. In which case, fuck right back to /pol/ and stay contained.

This post is inconsistent

He's obviosuly sick of liberal society and yearns for something more meanigful that materialistic cosmopolite shithole we have created for ourselves.

The question should perhaps be, how dangerous is modern society?

wrong

>fascist = racist

But user. What about spiritual notions of nationality?

What if I'm a rabid American nationalist who thinks all Americans--black, white, Hispanic, etc.--should be exalted?

I can agree that modern society is in many ways both existentially empty, and psychologically harmful and physically exploitatie of human beings.

And yet, the answer is not right wing extremsism. We can create a society with open and democratic education(see Dewey) with all our needs being meet and having low working hours, with sustainable systems, and a culture built around shared values (love, wisdom, going to space, w.e we see as beneficial to our humanity). One where nature is not being destroyed, where profits are not put over people, etc.

Rhats possible. That has always been what socialists have fought for, but you don't have to be a socialist to see the benefit of all of that. What we should be doijg is building institutions that sustain that kind of culture (see Finland).

Most of these ideas are either already working somewhere, or being partially applied.

Is that beneficisl to the world, or does that build a society of us vs them? Looks to me like America has enough nationalism, being described by many other people and nations as the single greatest threat to peace. We can't stop invading and warring, and nationalism is the backbone of that.

Of course it builds a society of us vs. them. That's sort of intrinsic to fascism. My point is that racism doesn't fundamentally need to be a component of the fascistic "us." I just chose America as an example.

It's a moot point, it has always been a part of fascism. It's the low hanging fruit, it's useful to do.

But yea, in our theoretical playtime, it's doesn't have to be a part of it, and we've arrived at an irrelevant point.

Neither is good, they often come together, and even if they don't they are individually bankrupt ideologies.