Is there anything more hypocritical than a /mu/ liberal?
A /pol/ conservative.
We're anarcho-syndicalists, not liberals.
>>54588929
haha the opposite meme
Is that Phil Fish?
Get these /pol/ fuckers outta here.
>>54588904
fuck all these libcucks on here
shame ted cruz is an awful spic canidate
>>54588904
i lie about being a liberal in public
or do i lie about being right wing here?
i cant tell anymore
>>54588904
>>54588929
>
>>54588950
>>54588958
>>54589355
>>54589775
>>54589818
>>54589878
im pakistani and proud mufugga
>implying all hip hop is homophobic
>implying enjoying art that is homophobic is an endorsement of homophobia
>implying that all liberals listen to hip hop
Is there anyone more retarded than OP? What shitty fucking logic. If you enjoy a classic literature novel with tones of antisemitism does that mean you must be a neo-nazi or be a hypocrite?
>>54588904
what is the point of that image? do you listen only to music with whose ideology you totally agree with? that's close minded.
>people are unable to enjoy something while also recognizing its' unsavory elements
holy shit, you're dumber than a sack of bricks
>>54588929
Any people having such a narrow and rigid point of view that his opinion about politics can be summed up by a word like "liberal", "conservative", "anarchist", "fascist", "communist", "right-wing", "left-wing", "center", "extremist" etc.
>>54588904
Why would homophobia be wrong?
Homophobia is more natural than homosexuality.
>>54590030
>I'm an enlightened fence sitter
Why would a liberal even go on 4chan? Surely they know this is a place for like, above-average intelligence people right? We're they just told we have cool memes and want to check it out or something?
>>54590050
i'd say that ignorance is just about as natural as being attracted to a person of the same gender
>>54590095
they're probably anthropologists
>>54590095
*tips fedora*
>>54590095
>Surely they know this is a place for like, above-average intelligence people right?
>We're they just told we have cool memes and want to check it out or something?
>We're they just told
>We're they
>>54590050
true, if anything its wrong to put someone on a crucifix for their personal beliefs (i.e. homophobia, racism) we should be more accepting of peoples ideologies
>>54590153
Sorry, I'm too busy of a person to check my auto correct errors fucking commie
>>54590160
i think it's even more wrong to crucify someone for something that they cannot change (homosexuality, race). nobody is born homophobic or racist, it's learned
>>54590225
>blaming autocorrect for an apostrophe
HURR DURR I'M TOO BUSY TO BE GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT I HAVE ABOVE-AVERAGE INTELLIGENCE.
>>54590225
kek
>>54590239
>cannot change (homosexuality,
>>54590116
There's literally nothing ignorant about being homophobic. It's a natural reflex to that which is unnatural.
Do you tag the word phobia onto someone who is repulsed by people who eat shit? Homosexuality is EXACTLY like a person eating shit. It's the exact type of unnatural.
>>54590334
>le naturalistic fallacy
>>54590279
Holy shit I'm sorry Santa didn't give you iq points for Christmas but it's not my fault. Maybe if you pray to Foucault and Marx a little more they'll give you some of theirs.
>>54590334
i don't think animals spend their time hating gay animals of the same species
>>54590362
>le nothing is wrong ever
>>54590239
The idea that homosexuality cannot be changed is a purely sociocultural construction. It's simply what happens when you conceive of homosexuality as a separate sexuality distinct from and comparable to heterosexuality, rather than simply an underdeveloped form of heterosexuality, which was common knowledge until society became perverted by a usage of language which they didn't understand.
The distinction between homosexual and heterosexual was initially descriptive. It started being used prescriptively 100% arbitrarily. No underlying scientific basis for doing so. Just an accident of history/language.
>>54590362
That's not a naturalistic fallacy. You're thinking of an appeal to nature. The naturalistic fallacy has nothing to do with 'nature', but rather the nature of an object, as in its philosophical essence. And what I said wasn't an appeal to nature. It wasn't simply saying homosexuality was wrong because it's unnatural. It's giving you actual content via comparison to show you exactly why its unnaturalness means also its wrongness.
If you accept homosexuality as natural, you must also accept those who eat shit as natural, something which you simply cannot do without making it obvious that you're just trying to be absurd and contrarian.
Checkmate literal faggots.
>>54590402
They don't have prefrontal cortexes comparable to those in humans.
>B T F O
>T
>F
>O
>>54589993
You're right.
>>54590410
>The idea that homosexuality cannot be changed is a purely sociocultural construction.
that's probably why people put through conversion therapy come out so well, huh
>No underlying scientific basis for doing so.
is "sexually attracted to members of the same sex" not a scientific enough basis
>>54590468
>If you accept homosexuality as natural, you must also accept those who eat shit as natural
6/10 i chuckled
>>54590468
Why do I give a fuck if some guy eats shit, doesn't affect me
>mfw /mu/ will never be anything but the worst board ever again
>>54588904
is there anything more hypocritical than a conservative ANYWHERE?
>>54590468
6/10 decent bait
>>54590498
>that's probably why people put through conversion therapy come out so well, huh
Yes because conversion therapy treats homosexuality as some mystified second state when in reality it's just a lesser state.
Also 'conversion therapy', or its historical analogue, has worked for millennia. It's only until up until recently that opposing social forces have complicated that original nonissue by putting gravity where it was not in the first place there; by telling people who are mentally ill that they have some sort of right to indulge in their mental illness at the cost of the economy of society because it's 'their' life and the society in which they live totally doesn't own them or anything.
You are society's bitch until you prove otherwise. Shouting about how much you love to suck cock isn't exactly successful in that capacity.
>>54590532
>le it doesn't effect me meme
This is why the enlightenment was shit
>>54590532
It has nothing to do with whether or not it affects you. It's about whether you yourself would do it.
>>54590491
we're so developed we can convince ourselves that something is morally wrong even thought it isn't . sure being gay is "unnatural" but is there any inherent evil in it? just stop caring about it
>>54590588
>le doubles
This is why 4chan wasn't a mistake
>>54590569
>has worked for millennia.
it has "worked" because, historically, the alternative to it working was being executed. the choice between "pretend to be 'cured' of my homosexuality" and "be stoned to death in town square" is a pretty easy one
>>54590592
Agreed. Personally I would never play lawn bowling so it ought to be punishable by death.
>>54590592
i wouldn't, and therefore i am not eating shit right now. the fella eating shit isn't doing so in any way that bothers or harms me.
>>54590588
If there was a rational counterargument you wouldn't just throw around epic memes
I'm surprised there aren't more libertarians on 4chan. Guess it's easier to make memes about one opposing political ideology than damning both.
>>54590279
this is autism
>>54590675
The argument is that everything that happens effects you and the society you live in so "it doesn't effect me" is not only fallicious, but also blatantly untrue
>>54590712
There were libertarians before they were redpilled by /pol/
>>54590468
shit isn't black and white and rational. Life, and especially human sexuality, is a big gray area
>>54590421
this
>>54590595
That's a nonstarter of a point. Morality doesn't exist apart from that conviction anyway. Morality literally IS that conviction. So it's a self-defeating point to make to say that we can 'convince ourselves that something is morally wrong even though it isn't', because the same can be said for all moral statements, and so the 'even though it isn't' thing is self-cancelling.
There doesn't need to be 'inherent evil' in something in order for it to be wrong. All that's sufficient (cf. necessary, so no, not everything which is unnatural is wrong) for something to be wrong is that it's unnatural.
The idea of evil doesn't come into existence apart from emotions. It's not an objective thing like wrongness is. It's only some after the fact type of psychological experience based on something being wrong. So not everything which is wrong is also evil.
>>54590625
That's not the only alternative. Alternatives include submitting oneself to religion, being cured through faith. The only reason you say that people only 'pretended' to be cured is because you reject that faith at a basic level and therefore can't make any conclusion with it as that would violate your rejection. It's the socially gravitational option to say that it was just a case of pretending when that's about one of the weakest generalisations you could make about millions of different people throughout history.
Nobody is born to be literally and specifically homosexual. The only reason homosexuality would have biological predispositions genetically and hormonally is out of specific circumstances relative to certain evolutionary contexts. Those contexts are the exception to the rule. When you take the contexts which are the rule to the exception you see that homosexuality is simply not only infeasible, but also purely impossible. All of the 'no, but's that you could think of by default fall into the case of exception.
Homosexuality cannot exist in a state of absolute nature, only in a relative one.
Social justice warriors are just as hateful and cancerous as neo-nazis.
Prove me wrong.
>>54590595
I don't understand why people justify their hate with "LEL IT'S UNNATURAL". You know what else isn't natural? Shitposting on 4chan instead of spreading your seed all over the place.
>>54590880
I know right, how dare people have different opinions as me.
>>54590712
That's because libertarians are ever more retarded than the worst liberals/conservatives on here. I'm more surprised that there aren't more libertarians because 4chan is full of retards. Now fuck off and go read Atlas Shrugged again. Leave the politics to the adults.
I'm shocked how easily people take bait on this site.
>>54590877
no you're right. People will defend their beliefs as much as any other ideological group that has ever existed
>>54590877
If by that you mean not at all than I would disagree since I've met some very hateful sjws
>>54590910
>spread bullshit
>questioned, argued with
>WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO CENSOR ME I GUESS YOU JUST CAN'T STAND THAT MY OPINION DIFFERS FROM YOURS HUH
That's an incredibly fucking weak point even by 4chan standards mate.
>>54590911
Very mature response, anon.
I'm surprised because the nature of this site feels more in line with libertarian principles compared to other sites.
>>54590933
I'm shocked how easily people get dubs on this board
>>54590859
your computer, your current residence, your clothes and likely some of your food is "unnatural". do you believe those things are wrong?
HE DID IT AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN OH OH
>>54590998
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
>>54590911
>libertarians are retarded
Justify this please.
>>54590654
Harm has nothing to do with what's right and wrong. It's just a byproduct.
>>54590816
It is black and white, you just refuse truth because to accept truth about one thing would make you accept truths about yourself. Something which you have your reasons for not doing.
>>54590880
Using your sexuality in a directly unnatural way is not comparable to using your fingers and eyes and mind in an indirectly unnatural way.
When something is directly unnatural, like using your penis, something which is in sex supposed to go inside of a vagina, to fuck a man's sweaty arsehole, or eating shit which was excremented from your body, the literal opposite of eating, that is sufficient for it to be despicable, hatable. In fact if you don't hate things like that there's something deeply wrong with you as a human being.
Doing something only indirectly unnatural like using your digits for manual, digital tasks, or using your visual system to look at something, or using your mind to read or think, things which are all natural uses of such systems, for an ultimately, indirectly unnatural purpose, shitposting on 4chan, is not unnatural in the same way as is taking a cock in your asshole from another man.
So basically get fucked you dumb faggot. Stay mad that people have a literal and logical right to hate you.
>>54590535
I feel for you brother
>>54590993
Not even the guy you were replying to kek
>>54591025
See
>>54591057
Now tell me, how does it feel to be stupid?
>>54591031
THE ABSOLUTE MADMAN
>>54591036
I won't bother looking into where you found this ridiculous quote, but you might ACTUALLY be delusional if you believe left and right politics are more capable than libertarian principles in reinforcing independence and more in-touch with the "real world."
>>54591051
Which kind are you?
>>54591057
You post all this shit and respond to all this people but you fail to make a single compelling point. "It's unnatural because it makes me feel gross, I mean isn't it fucking gross? lol". Is it despicable to fuck a woman's sweaty, bacteria-infested asshole? If not, why a man's?
I'm not even gay faggot. I used to be a homophobe like you because my Dad raised me that way but then I grew up a little bit and eventually so did he.
>>54591057
>Harm has nothing to do with what's right and wrong
so you're saying that, theoretically, something that does nothing but benefit those involved can be "wrong", while something that only harms all involved can be "right". how is that NOT ridiculous?
>>54591154
I almost hope you will someday live in a true libertarian society so your poor basement dwelling ass can be raped by corporations that no longer have any sort of regulation.
>>54591154
You are really dumb if you think libertarians are not part of the left/right paradigm
>>54591154
he's talking about right libertarianism, don't be naive to the point of thinking that it doesn't fit in the conventional political spectrum
>>54591084
nah.
>Using your sexuality in a directly unnatural way is not comparable to using your fingers and eyes and mind in an indirectly unnatural way.
what a fucking cop-out answer lol
>says something stupid
>is called out on why it's so stupid
>"oh no THIS is what i really meant"
how does it feel to know absolutely nothing about the world
What's the difference between libertarianism and anarchy?
>not music related
Delete this fucking thread already
>>54591212
None, I guess, but I admit I didn't bother to read them all. You do know not all libertarians are anarchists, or think food shouldn't be regulated, etc
Can you justify the "libertarians are retarded" bit?
>>54590468
This is exactly the problem - why is 'natural' always presupposed as the be-all and end-all of desirability, even though natural is nothing but a buzzword for 'things which don't gross me out'?
Everything is essentially natural insofar as it occurs in nature (as in, governed by the natural laws of the world and universe).
You're one spooked dude
>>54591070
Your post was still retarded and you're still a retard, I don't care what else you've posted ITT
>>54591374
Ya, well YOUR post is retarded and YOU'RE retarded!
>>54591238
It is wrong to fuck a girl's ass rather than her pussy and if you favour the one over the other you're probably a latent homo (maybe not a closeted one, but a latent one), but not categorically wrong like homosexuality is.
If you think my reasoning doesn't go beyond 'it's wrong because it's lol gross' then I feel bad for you and the shitty life which must come from such low reading comprehension.
>>54591243
Because benefit in your case is relative. It doesn't actually benefit them and if they had any sense of what they were doing they would be faced with the enormity of the terribleness to it. Homosexuals are sort of comparable to serial killers specifically in that they really just have no sense of what they do and that's exactly what makes them what they are.
If something is harmful, chances are it's also wrong. But just because something doesn't seem harmful does not mean it's not wrong.
>>54591301
Libertarians typically still want government, just a small one. Also, most anarchists outside 4chan are left wing
>>54591286
Lol look at you struggling.
>what a fucking cop-out answer lol
>doesn't give an reason for it to be a cop-out
>thinks him calling it a cop-out isn't just in itself a cop-out
How does it feel to be a 'stupid person'? When people talk about 'stupid people', you're literally one of the people they're referring to.
>>54591420
>Homosexuals are sort of comparable to serial killers specifically in that they really just have no sense of what they do and that's exactly what makes them what they are.
holy shit, you're delusional. if this is a ruse, genuine props for being so dedicated to it. if not, maybe you should try going out and interacting with an actual person sometime
>>54589914
Sorry pal, but you can't really expect nuance from the /pol/ scum that won't get off of this board.
Protip: https://sys.4chan.org/mu/imgboard.php?mode=report&no=54588904
>>54591331
If you didn't bother to read it why would you ask me a dumb question like that?
Chiggity-check yourself before you wreck yourself
[spoiler]Big dicks in your ass is bad for your health[/spoiler]
>>54591301
Libertarianism is anarchy for rich people and retarded poor/middle class right wingers who think that said rich people won't instantly rape them the second "big" government stops regulating corporations.
>>54591334
Natural means efficient. Natural does not mean simply that which exists in the universe, as that would make that which we already know to be unnatural, natural, and hence defeat the purpose of the word to begin with.
Homosexuality is inefficient, therefore it is unnatural, therefore it is wrong. We've known this since Aristotle. Anybody who argues with it is a mentally ill, compulsive contrarian, or somebody with no grasp of logic.
>>54591463
it seems like you only read the first few lines of anything anyone ever replies to you with
when people refer to "bigots that are doing nothing but helping reinforce unnecessary, oppressive social hierarchies" you're one of the people they're referring to.
i'm going to go ahead and guess you also believe that the poor are poor because of their own incompetence and deserve no help
>>54591420
>It is wrong to fuck a girl's ass rather than her pussy
Why. Is it wrong to not be dictated by evolution and primal urges every second of every day? I'm really struggling to see why you're so bothered by two sweaty guys rubbing up on each other and enjoying themselves in the privacy of a home.
I'd like to point out that if you're trolling it's pointless, my time is worth literally nothing.
>>54591566
>66
these dubas worth something .-)
>>54591546
>natural means efficient
nobody told me this was one of those arguments where we change what words mean on the fly to support our faulty arguments! shit, i could have saved a lot of time replying
>>54591269
When did I say that? Obviously certain ideals and opinions will overlap. Generally speaking, I'd say libertarians side more with the left in terms of social policies and with the right when it comes to economics. I'm talking about the overall agenda of the Republican and Democratic parties and how they enforce codependency and are more out of touch with reality. Sure, a truly libertarian America will probably never happen, but that doesn't mean the principles are a "childish fantasy." If anything, I'd argue they're far more reasonable and reality-based than the left and the right.
>>54591285
The core principle is freedom - whether it falls on the left or right of the spectrum shouldn't be a concern to true libertarians. Now, with big L Libertarians it kinda does because they're attempting to reinvent the GOP as the party for liberty. They're still far from being completely associated with the current idea of a "conservative."
>>54591485
Because it's 100% strawman bullshit and I was able to see foresee I would not associate with any of the images even if I did read them.
Can you justify the "libertarians are retarded" bit, using your words and not some shitty political cartoon?
why does such obvious shit-tier bait always result in hundreds of pseudo philosophical posts by teenagers with no fucking clue?
>>54591269
what the hell are you talking about
both left and right are statist
>>54591546
>Homosexuality is inefficient...therefore it is wrong
so, sex for pleasure is also wrong in your eyes. that explains a lot.
>>54591609
>whether it falls on the left or right of the spectrum shouldn't be a concern to true libertarians
Try saying that to an ancap or an ancom
>>54591565
when people refer to "bigots that are doing nothing but helping reinforce unnecessary, oppressive social hierarchies", everyone calls them retarded
>>54591543
Yea, because those big scary monopolies certainly don't thrive better in a market filled with government regulations (many of which they lobby for themselves) that kill their competition.
>>54591616
Do you really think big corporations wouldn't fuck everyone over?
