Can we have a discussion about art?
Do you consider paintings like this to be artistic? Where do you draw the line between art and no-art?
I believe that art doesn't necessarily have to be beautiful or aesthetically pleasing, but it has to elicit at least some kind of reaction from the viewer.
>>469058
>I believe that art doesn't necessarily have to be beautiful or aesthetically pleasing, but it has to elicit at least some kind of reaction from the viewer.
Literally everything in the world elicits some kind of reaction, on some scale. Is everything art?
>>469062
Only if it was made with that purpose.
What's the story behind this painting? How come Satan ended up here?
>>476292
he gave us knowledge, he enlightend us. God that piece of shit punished him for that.
He passed through the gates of Hell in an attempt to find Eden and roamed the anarchy of Chaos before he encountered Uriel.
>>476313
>He passed through the gates of Hell in an attempt to find Eden and roamed the anarchy of Chaos before he encountered Uriel.
He fought with Uriel ?
why does communism is the left in general have such an excellent musical history? also feel free to post lefty music
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWTXyO2MOlQ
>>476114
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmPX9cJHXyI
>>476114
Propaganda ministries, you are supposed to like it.
>>476114
>we were supposed to rise
I come from one of the rare american communist families that survived the blacklisting and public persecutions of the american nazi government of the 60's
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTJWLVdoa1c
So what exactly constitutes a "spook"?
From what I gathered, from the dank memes on /his/ and Stirner's wiki page, is that a spook is an arbitrary idea, limiting us in one way or another. Good? Bad? Are "spooks" a spook?
>>476000
creative nothing is a spook
the ego is a spook
the distinction between ego and non ego is a spook
stirner was actually a c.uckold
stirner is for kids too lazy to read heidegger
>a spook is an arbitrary idea, limiting us in one way or another.
That's one use of the term. A spook is morality that you obey, but have no physical reason to. If you want to copulate with someone, but you "can't" because you're "married" then that's a spook. There's nothing physically stopping you except an idea you enslave yourself to.
Spooks are concepts that basically only exist if you beleive in them.
Let's say you kill someone. Well it's against the "law" but the law isn't real, only the force behind it is. Or you might say what you did was "immoral" but again morality isn't real.
A Spook basically tries to control you and it only works if you believe in it. Of course Stirner isn't saying we should go around killing each other but killing is an option. It's importaint that whether you kill or don't kill someone you do it entirly because you want to, and not because a spook told you.
>"We will bury you!"
What did he mean by this?
>>475250
It's well documented he really said we will outlast you.
>>475250
"What the bourgeoisie therefore produces, above all, are its own grave-diggers. Its fall and the victory of the proletariat are equally inevitable."
- The Communist Manifesto
it means he's gonna fuck ur ass while u sleep and slice ur throat with that sickle then smash ur balls with the hammer everything while u sleep and ur blood will be as red as the soviet flag u fukin foggottoti
>Christianity then
>"We believe that everything in the bible literally happened. We have no moral trouble with worming our way in to society's institutions, laws, torturing people etc. How DARE you question the bible when it's God's message to us"
>Christianity now
>"Dude, you actually believe that the bible is real? Bro, it's a PRANK, it's metaphorical, its a PRANK! How DARE you question the bible when it has had a big influence on our society, nvm the fact that we can't watch an alternate reality where Christianity wasn't invented. Lmao, look at the reddit neckbeards!"
OK, I'm agnostic but you get the gist. Christianity has gone from essential to an ornament for people to wave about as a way of gaining respectability points. Everyone on lit wishes they were Christian. That's the level of faux patrician were talking about
>>475009
It's just like kids longing for the nineties. Or /pol/ longing for a nazi Reich. People tend to believe the grass is greener on things they have no experience with.
>>475009
Christianity is making a comeback in circles like 4chan for the same reason militant atheism had a huge boom during the late 2000s and early 2010s.
People who were previously Christian found out that a lot of what they were told frankly isn't true, so they rebel against it by being as un-Christian as possible. 4chan however is populated by shut-ins who's only real experience with theology was militant atheists on the internet, so when they find out a lot of what these knee-jerk atheists is saying isn't true they turn to radical Christianity.
It's bizarre.
Bible is not a single thing. It's a collection of 40 or so book, histories, poetry/song annals, prophecies and wisdom literature. You can't generalize how it is to be read.
Also not being familiar with basic concepts of literary studies such as literal and symbolical and more complex levels of narration.
What would China look like if he could have won?
>>474644
Fascist pretty much. Peeps seem to forget Mao and The Shek are cut from the same cloth. Just add more Nepotism in the case of Chiang Kai-Shek.
Probably like this.
>>474665
And I'm sure the Generalissimo would make tens of millions starve to death due to a retarded take on Marxist agriculture and then spend the next decade trying to self-genocide Chinese culture too right?
Here we talk about the longest losing streak in /His/tory
What went wrong for the Americans, every single fucking time?
>>474285
Butthurt incoming
>>474285
>What went wrong for the Americans, every single fucking time?
Ameriniggers can't touch the North. Thats it really.
They can bomb it.
They can black ops it.
But the moment they invade it, China and Russia will go apeshit and turn Vietnam into another Korean War style disaster.
So they can't plug the source of the guerillas, the attacks on the South, because they're afraid of escalation.
Not because North Vietnam or the Vietcong are master guerillas or something.
>>474307
>During the Sino-Russian split Russia and China would agree on fighting a war 3000 miles away.
Mao had most of his troops deployed in Amur dumbass. They were at war with Russia.
Who's your favorite person that ever lived?
me
>>474203
Gonna have to go with this one (not you but me).
all them low level American and Soviet fucks in charge of nukes who decided not to fire them based on realistic looking information
The year is 1941. You're a young man, somewhere between 18-26 living in the US. You open the newspaper and read the Japanese just attacked Pearl Harbor. This means America is now in the war. You were registered for the draft.
If you serve, there is a likelihood that you may die or not come home in one piece.
Luckily, you were not selected by the draft to serve so you are given the choice. Do you choose to serve anyway, and if so why?
Try approaching the question only with the knowledge that someone in that position would have. Don't look at post war statistics to justify choice.
>>474050
Yes, because unlike OP I'm not a pussy and in general statistically likelyhood, the more people join the less likely the individual chance of my death overall is.
Plus I'm sure the Coast Guard needs able men.
>>474057
You don't necessarily know where or what you'll be doing.
>>474050
Oh hell no.
ITT: Absolute Madmen.
>
>>473900
Ungern Von Sternberg is amazing
Two Rabbis read the Torah and come to different conclusions because of their interpretation of some minor point scripture
>The Two Rabbis get into a long argument with each other which goes on for decades much to the annoyance of their families
Two Christian Priests/Ministers/Whatever read the bible and come to different conclusions because of their interpretation of some minor point of scripture
>(Before 1800) The two priests decry each other as agents of Satan seeking to lead people to ruin, denounce each other as heretics and attempt to have the other burned along with all his writings
>(After 1800) the two priests think of each other as agents of Satan seeking to lead people to ruin but refrain from having him burnt as that is not done these days, instead they get into long winded arguments which go on for decades much to the annoyance of their families.
Two Muslim Imams read the Koran and come to different conclusions because of their interpretation of some minor point of scripture
>The two Imams decry each other as agents of Satan seeking to lead people to ruin, denounce each other as heretics and attempt to have the other burned along with all his writings
>>473293
the key is cutting the tip off of your penis
Second Mormonism when?!
>>473293
I'm noticing a pattern here
Memes aside, what is your opinion on Marx and his work?
>>473149
An incredibly deep and prolific thinker, and one of the most important in history.
A detailed analysis of history ending up being useless at predicting the future.
>>473179
>predicting the future
THIS IS THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF MARX'S THEORY, STOP SPOUTING MEMES, READ THE FUCKING MANUAL
Were the Byzantines actually Roman? If the religion, location, culture, military and government were different than are they any different than the other empires who claimed to be the heir to the Roman Empire?
Yes of course. When the empire split in 395 the Bynatines were the eastern half. Bynatium was a name created after the fall for historcal records to tell the difrance after the fact.
One could aruge after the adoption of greek in the 600s that they were no longer roman though.
As the first anon who replied said, of course they were Roman. However, the Greek cultural influence slowly won out over the centuries.
After watching the documentary series "making a murderer" i have a lot of questions about the whole jury system in murrica.
Its a "classic" story about the american court system failing massively, not only because one of the defendents couldnt pay 100 thousands of dollars for a lawyer, but i think mainly because the whole case is decided by 12 random people with no expertise.
As a german, the whole jury system is pretty alien to me. In germany we have 1 judge in smaller cases and 3 judges in more serious, violent crimes. Myself and many germans prefer it that way, but i know many americans find this system absurd.
How can you give so much power to 12 completey random people?
Now this is gonna sound weird, but why cant jurors ask questions during the trial? They potentionally decide to kill someone, so every detail should be explained to them until they understand it perfectly. Maybe even until some third party is convinced the juror actually understands.
Refering back to the documentary, some people just arent very smart, actually fuck that, some people are really fucking stupid. They dont grasp the concept of evidence and proof, they dont understand reasonable doubt.
jurors decide not to talk it through as long as it takes, because they wanna go home, cuase they got shit to do.
People have issues with racism, prejeduice, get influenced by emotions etc. They can even decide that despite it being absolutely 100% clear that the defendent did it, to let him walk free, for no reason.
Do you think if we could just implement a completely new justice system tomorrow, someone would defend the jury system over something like 1 judge, multiple judges, a jury made up out of lawyers and judges, maybe juror as a completely standalone job, you'd still have to study law to some extent.
All of these systems have problems and flaws, but less than "just let 12 randoms decide whatever they want ignoring facts and law alike"
>>472475
I watched that doco as well recently, pretty fucking scary something like that.
>>472475
the whole point of the American justice system in trials is to have a jury by "peers" these people do not need to necessarily be the brightest or the best, it goes into the requirements that the guilt must be beyond reasonable doubt to convict someone, so what is reasonable doubt is dependent on ones peers
>>472475
You'd be better off asking in reference to a Westminster Common Law system rather than a semi-code civil system like the US.
