What are common humanist/liberal talking points?
This post is not intended for discussion, but rather I'd like to know the common statements yo'd see on social media, tele or verbal chatter.
I want to solidfy something I'm working on, it'd be nice if you have images.
Excuse me
Humanism can be defined as any things, from humanism as a form of egalitarianism that strictly excludes animals to humanism+ which is... A SJW movement, right to a theist belief that the most relatable face of God is the combined human group consciousness and the will is has through human society.
Don't even get me started on liberal.
Are you new here?
>>79288525
I don't see what you are trying to imply here. I don't inherently give a shit whether it is good or bad I just want to know what the latter talks about.
For example
"Why do white people x or y"
>>79288525
Specifically
>Generally, however, humanism refers to a perspective that affirms some notion of human freedom and progress. In modern times, humanist movements are typically aligned with secularism, and today humanism typically refers to a non-theistic life stance centred on human agency and looking to science rather than revelation from a supernatural source to understand the world.
>>79288709
I'm trying to get your definitions of each word. A common ground absolutely needs to be established before any intellectual conversation, debate or dialectic, which I suppose this is the latter.
Define humanist.
Define liberal.
If you can't, you just failed whatever you're working on.
Seriously, are you new here? When the OP isn't a shitpost /pol/ is actually hard core philosophy, along with /his/ too but /his/ would be more favourable to what I suppose you're arguing against.
>"Why do white people x or y"
Immediately, I can say that's a racial generalisation and throw it right out unless you're talking about physiology or biology.
>>79288956
I'm honestly surprised you replied, you seem rather knowledgable. This is why I like 4chan /pol/ specifically because you get diamonds in the rough.
>I'm trying to get your definitions of each word. A common ground absolutely needs to be established before any intellectual conversation, debate or dialectic, which I suppose this is the latter.
I agree, I'm mostly use to discussing things with people I know and can already communicate with them as they understand my definitions, so that's a error on my end.
>Humanist
Read the post above
>Liberal
Neo-liberal, mostly the social class of students, state and upper class who believe use liberalism as a commodity rather then an actual belief. I wanted to specifically create a video analyzing exactly why white people hold their values and what the opposition forget to investigate into, or rather ignore due to their absolutism.
>>79288920
Interesting, probably from Wikipedia, and also vague as Hegel.
Humanism as an atheist morality movement is one thing, I find it hard to find any faults besides that it completely removes any mysticism from life, leading it dull and uninspired. Atheists in general suck at art though.
It's actually a strong 7/10 attempt at secular virtue, not as great as the categorical imperative and the extension of it "enlightened self-interest," but fairly decent. Go watch Sargons video on humanism, he talks about how this is perverted and gives his decent opinion on humanism. He's actually a humanist, I'm not and I'm not even an atheist.
>>79289271
No, I always respond when I see something that's real philosophy, theology or sociology. Basically any soft science/academia that isn't dripping with the drool of SJW retardation.
>liberalism as a commodity
You mean virtue signalling?
Liberalism is kind of binary, which is why the internet was so quick to point out the regressive liberals as... regressive. Things either promote fair, equal treatment or... don't? You can't commoditize this because you can't quantify this.
>white people .. value
I actually want to make a video demonstrating that what we're trying to grasp at is actually a weird media lie for about 3 plausible reasons I can come up with. I think we're getting closer, you're talking about the extreme left wing or rather what's pigeonholed onto the left.
Post structuralism
Post modernism
New age slave morality
Cultural Marxism (although never use those words together)
Third wave movements
Dark enlightenment (another no no to actually use)
This is what we're talking about. Liberalism is a word they corrupted so as to prematurely silence the group now calling themselves libertarianism, who always tend towards moderate bipartisanism and are quite resistant to any extremism except anarchy.
>>79290004
I disagree with your definitons, and I find cultural marxism to have lost it's value through overuse much like racism. So we can avoid confusion rather then treading over our own definitions, I'll explain directly what I want to criticize.
I want to specifically target people like "Kuledud3" (Specifically look at his twitter) to people like "Milo Yiannopolous" and to the types you'd find in majority present on the internet, infesting twitter who are apologetic for the same muslims who hold have laws defined which make it legal to kill their kin if found.
I want to target their delusions, abstractions and ideology as well as speak about just what conservative caucasian people believe and follow and present this in a way everyone can understand.
>>79291046
So, by your definition the regressive left, the moderate and the "Pigeonholed"
>>79291046
Marxism itself is hard to define, but I assure you it can and it definitely hasn't lost its meaning. It's still identifiable by its tactics and methods, as well as its goal: in this case conflict between demographics, or class conflict after demographics have been matched to classes.
Before I waste my time, is kule dud number 3 actually popular? Or is he another dud?
>>79291237
I say pigeonholed because watch the two political bipartisan camps shift over the next 50 years. They might even wrap around, like they have in the past.
Marxism and the "totally not overtly Marxist, but everyone knows we are, so what you going to do about it?" thing is only contemporarily what's on the left.
And Islamic apologism has most similarities with Chamberlain appeasement that lead to the rise of Hitler. It's all about not poking a tiny bear cub now and expecting it to recognise this and not maul us when it's grown up.
>>79292040
> but I assure you it can and it definitely hasn't lost its meaning. It's still identifiable by its tactics and methods, as well as its goal: in this case conflict between demographics, or class conflict after demographics have been matched to classes.
You have a point, but /pol/ takes a big shit all over it.
I think you are giving these people far too much credit with that last part.
He has 500k subs, an audience enough.
>>79292302
Just because it's not an explicit policy doesn't mean it's not their tactic. The people we're dealing with are lacking historical, philosophical and ironically even sociological education. Anyone who knows about Chamberlain knows appeasement is failure.
And otherwise, quite a few people I have in mind are politicians and media personalities. No, they're quite intelligent and know what they're doing.
>>79292594
>Chamberlain appeasement
Wow, okay thank you for showing me this.
But how do you associate such a thing with islam?
Just be similarities or by actual evidential behaviour?
>>79292594
I'll be entirely honest with you, my dislike for their nature just comes from the rejection of tolerance towards something which en masse wants to kill me, whether it be my homosexuality, my views or my religious views.
I did not know about chamberlain, you might find this narcissistic but I find that my views are usually founded upon what benefits me and the people surrounding me rather then an abstraction, ideology or creation of the state. So I reject such things as tolerance or the regressive left even though by historical context I am a leftist.
>>79292854
Simple.
The rise of Nazism was a storm on the horizon, as is Islamic extremism. The real fun is when environmentalism wins, we move to nuclear power and you ain't seen mad Arabs until they're no longer kept at bay with oil trade.
>>79293057
Christian culture, that is where this tolerance comes from, is difficult to accept, it's actually a turn the other cheek thing. Believe it or not but despite the rise of atheism our society is as true to Christianity as it's ever been.
>my views are usually founded upon what benefits me
Congratulations, you're a normal person. Just like me, just like everyone you've ever met.
Just keep learning. There is never nothing more to learn. Come to think of it, this is why I'm not making videos, I need more. It's never enough.
>>79293635
I'd actually agree, funnily enough as much as the regressive left hates christanity, it is where ironially most of their progressive values come from.
I think I won't make the video, as they say the people who are knowledgable usually stay reserved and studious, while the uninformed are the loudest. Have a good night mate, I'll be watching a documentary on zimbabwe and getting ready for work after.
