>killing all drug users
>bad
>putting political dissidents in concentration camps
>bad
>>81052500
Clearly you don't know Ireland all that well little yellow man
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Action_Against_Drugs
Kneecapping dealers erryday. I know dealers who've been drove out of the country by the IRA.
Since when is the punishment for using drugs in Korea death?
>>81052500
>korea trying to make people think he is flip, which he normally hates
>>81053444
Thats just cos the ira want to take over the drug business
If weed became legal in Japan their animus would enter the 6th dimension.
>>81053444
>a modern use for the IRA
I wish them every success.
Aren't other IRA factions funded by drug dealing though?
>>81052500
what if im asian but i live in the us. My parents are from Thailand
>>81052500
>someone does something that has no impact on you whatsoever
>"let's kill 'em"
>>81053444
They were also doing business with infamous Boston organized criminal and well known drug trafficker Whitey Bulger to smuggle weapons. Not very consistent if you ask me.
>>81053444
they take out other drug dealers and deal drugs themselves
>>81053910
>>81054079
>>81054498
If you think the IRA are funded by drugs your very wrong
>>81054448
>lol wtf everyone is on drugs and doesn't know how to function
>how'd this happen haha
>>81054448
DUDE
>>81054738
Multiple IRA factions are heavily involved in the drug trade.
>>81054853
WED
>>81054741
>implying everyone is on drugs
>implying in non-urban cesspits drug users aren't shunned or otherwise shamed into their own little worlds where no one interacts with them expect other drug using degenerates
매일 써.
>>81053444
they are kind of hypocrites though
you know they will let ones stay who give them a cut of the drug profit
i would do the same thing though because its easy shekels
>>81053444
m8...
That's because those dealers are competition
>>81055716
I hate to use an overused term, but recreational drugs are for degenerates.
>>81056128
Yes, I agree. But other people being degenerates is no concern of mine unless they fuck with me - it's completely irrelevant.
>>81054120
Then you get good grads and have favorable odds of getting into an upper tier college.
>>81055716
t. pothead
>>81052500
>>81052654
I don't disagree with you, gook.
Liberalism was a mistake.
>>81054448
>>81055716
>>81056289
>things are only unjust or immoral if they personally affect me or another discrete individual
>I do not care about society at large, its effect on he collective, nor its effect on future generations.
Wew lad.
>seasoning food
>>81056379
t. crystal ball reader
I find it funny since I've not so much as touched a drug in my life or been drunk even once, yet I'm assumed a pothead just because I don't want people to be assaulted for fucking up their own lives. Hilarious.
>>81056685
>everyone is responsible for everyone else's immorality and dumbfuckery
wew lad, tone down the collectivism
>>81052500
Fuck off US colony scum, North Korea is still best Korea
>boil man's best friend alive
>bad
>>81057218
>>everyone is responsible for everyone else's immorality and dumbfuckery
Yes, we are, at least to a reasonable degree.
Civilization and society are a collective effort, it is utterly arrogant to presume that pretending men are independent atoms will lead to a satisfactory outcome, let alone that it won't lead to cancerous degeneration of society generations down the line.
Individualism, in the most pure and base sense of the word, is for those that refuse to have accountability for their people and their society, and see fit to leave our future to the blind hand of natural process.
It is lazy at best, sociopathic most commonly, and misanthropic at worst.
>>81057901
>Yes, we are
So when a nigger rapes or kills your niece, you're responsible for that.
>>81058078
While the nigger is predominately responsible (he is the one who acted in the first place); yes, I am.
I could have been more attentive, or more safe.
My niece could have been more attentive, or more prepared to defend herself.
That nigger could have been above a life of crime if any other of innumerably many variables were different.
Niggers could have been expunged from the nation in the first place decades ago, or might never have been here had there been no slavery.
The niggers is 99% responsible for his actions, but ultimately it is the environment that created the nigger, or that causes my niece to not be safe enough, and so on.
Of course, this is not an argument for having pity towards the nigger; The lion is an animal, nothing more or less; that does not mean we should not kill it for attacking men.
>>81058848
>yes, I am
So why don't we put you in prison with the nigger?
>>81053444
>>81053892
>>81054079
>>81054498
>all this Irish
>>81059175
Are you willfully ignoring the rest of my post, or just trolling?
We imprison criminals for actions, not others ultimately assisting that criminal in some way.
Should we imprison his mother for giving birth to him, since he would eventually go on to be a murderer? No, of course not.
Regardless, however, he is still a product of his mother, of society, and the terribly unfortunate outcome of that crime is also a result of me not being their to defend my niece, nor my niece being able to defend herself.
>>81059759
>not others ultimately assisting that criminal in some way
I'm pretty sure we punish people who are responsible for crimes. An accomplice in a murder goes to court and is punished. You are telling me explicitly you are an accomplish in the hypothetical nigger's crime given you are responsible (magically) for what the nigger did.
If a person is a deterministic product of their environment, I don't know in what world that person can be morally culpable for *anything* they do. Yet you're telling me they are while *simultaneously* maintaining that *so is EVERYONE else* in the universe, yet the nigger should be treated differently for some reason than those other people.
>>81053444
>white people
Leave it to potato nogs to fail reading comprehension.
>>81052500
you niggers (asians) are more racist than white people! but your smart, you keep your mouths shut and just open business in black neighborhoods. white people talk to much and make less money. good tactics yellow anon.
>>81054448
>funding violent gangs
>DUDE IT HAS NO IMPACT ON YOU GROW UP LMAO BLAZE IT
Retards like you deserve to be hanged.
tiocfaidh ar la
Our day will come, what a glorious day for Ireland's fighting sons
Tiocfaidh ar la
We will be free, Ireland, our lord and liberty
This is now an IRA thread
>>81060962
The IRA are a joke now.
>>81060901
Kill people who are extorted by the mafia too then, since them working and making money funds the mafia.
>>81060962
sick nasheed bro
>>81060349
>An accomplice in a murder goes to court and is punished.
Is the man who legally sold a gun to someone who then goes on to commit a shooting an accomplice?
>If a person is a deterministic product of their environment, I don't know in what world that person can be morally culpable for *anything* they do
Where did I say anything about determinism? Unless you want to start getting into whether or not free will exists or not (which is a meaningless question with a meaningless answer, but I will assume that free will does exist), a person is still a product (or at least heavily influenced) by their environment.
They still must make decisions based on their values, perceived costs, and perceived benefits, but those values and perceptions are shaped by their environment over their entire life.
Had that nigger never been born, he wouldn't have committed that murder. Had he been raised properly, he wouldn't have committed that murder. Has I been their to defend my niece, his murder would have been unsuccessful. Any number of things could have gone differently to have prevented this murder from happening, or to mitigate the chances of succeeding.
The only reason he is punished is because he is the one that ultimately made the decision on whether or not to kill, and while he and his decision are ultimately influenced by his environment, punishing those who do take those actions is an effective potential cost to dissuade them from taking that action in the first place.
>>81061286
Spoiler: I know, but it wasn't always that way
:(
>>81054925
Yeah busy getting btfo by the kinahan gang
The faggots that tried to muscle in. feeling hard because muh continuity IRA; their leader was assasinated and his little brother was gunned down in his car few weeks ago
Continuity IRA is to the IRA what skinheads are to nazis and inbred hillbillies to americans; not to mention they got cucked and again gunned down for supplying weapons for the hotel shooting from earlier this year
>>81059582
I know we are based.
>>81061670
Great analysis of the IRA splinter groups, thoroughly entertaining post, lots of cuck rhetoric. I like it. Could you provide me with more insight? Irish American here!
>>81053444
boy at my school got kneecapped last year, bled out in the front garden while the family were in the house. Norn Iron obviously. you know they just sell drugs themselves? paras are full of lowlife chavs who have are uneducated and unemployable, hence they do this and pretend to be heroes to someone...
>>81062306
*boy at my schools dad
>>81054448
>someone walks around the streets on meth
>someone drives drunk
>kids get raised in a druggy household and ends up another criminal
>lol just wait until he does kill your kids, prevention is oppressive and we're all islands until someone stabs you
>>81061441
>Is the man who legally sold a gun to someone who then goes on to commit a shooting an accomplice?
I'm asking you that question. Where does "accomplish" start and "not-accomplice" end if *ANYONE AND EVERYONE* is responsible for the stupid nigger's actions? They're all responsible - why aren't they punished? Where is the justice for the mother of your niece when everyone in the world who was also responsible for the murder of her daughter doesn't get even a slap on the wrist?
>I will assume free will exists, but a person is still a product of their environment
Utterly incompatible views. Compatibalist "free will" isn't free will at all.
>Had that nigger never been born, he wouldn't have committed that murder
Correct.
>Had he been raised properly, he wouldn't have committed that murder
Incorrect. He may have committed that murder no matter how he was raised. But these points are just more chatter poised around a kind of environmental determinism that I have no reason whatsoever to accept as true.
>he is the one that ultimately made the decision
We punish tons of people who didn't "ultimately make the decision" in life constantly. And here you are, telling me that *EVERYONE* shares responsibility for *EVERYONE ELSE'S ACTIONS*, yet you seem completely against the idea of punishing them. What does punishment or justice even mean to you?
>>81052500
Forcing people to integrate and not putting up with stupid religious bullshit.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-36738682
>>81062860
>Where does ... actions?
Ideally, it would depend on intent.
Did that gun-shop owner intend to sell that nigger a gun so he could shoot my niece?
Did that nigger's mother give birth to that nigger with the intent that he'd kill my niece?
Did I willfully and negligently ignore my niece's safety?
>They're all responsible - why aren't they punished?
Who says they're equally responsible?
Is someone who donates ten dollars to Clinton as responsible as someone who donates ten million towards potentially getting her elected?
>Utterly ... will at all.
If you are born in Saudi Arabia, you are most likely to be raised Muslim.
You are likely to be taught Muslim and Arab values from the moment of your birth, all through your childhood, and all through your life from before you were even sapient, to when you were mentally mature and beyond.
You had no choice in where you were born, and all of your further thought from thereon is through the bias of the culture and environment you were raised in.
>Incorrect. ... he was raised.
Possibly, but had his family been a nice middle class nuclear family in the safe suburbs who drove him to chess club, he may have turned out an entirely different man.
Humans are ultimately entirely the product of their environment, of their memories, of their subconscious analyzation of those memories, of their experiences. Ultimately, however, all action is caused by someone deciding what to do based on what they know, and that decision making is sometimes faulty, or sometimes in opposition to decisions that others have made.
>We punish ... constantly.
Could I have an example?
>What ... to you?
Creating a suitably high potential cost for an action that we don't want to occur relative to anyone who might do so, and carrying out that cost as a further disincentive to those who might do the same.
Executing the nigger that killed my neice won't bring her back, but it will show other niggers that murder gets you killed.
>>81062017
I only really know what every Tom, Dick and Harry does over there
Two crime families are at war; Continuity IRA and other IRA groups still publicly operating are in the business of drug dealing, providing weapons and extortion
They were meant to be providing protection and weapons for the Hutch gang and did their job with the regency hotel attack, however since they have been btfo (Ryan's little brother was shot dead sitting outside his kid's school after just being released from prison) the man who supplied the guns to the hutches has since been killed.
The kinahans who are at the other side are one of the most powerful and notorious cartels GLOBALLY, supply most of the gear entering the UK and opperate out of costa del sol in spain to stay off the grid.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmWnO0ZWnCc
>>81055991
뭔 잡소리야
>>81057380
said worst portugal
>>81052500
doing things our way.
>>81053681
It's not.
It's just like, a trillion years in prison. SK shits on drug dealing even harder than the US does.
>>81064310
You can't judge intent. You're existentially incapable. A person can confess to an evil intent and have had none whatsoever, or a person can deny intent and be acquitted while having been guilty of wicked intent all along and you'd never be able to discern in either case.
It doesn't matter the proportion of responsibility for an evil (I don't know in what world you could ever quantify that to begin with) - if someone is responsible for an evil they're responsible for it. If they're not punished, then what does your "responsibility" even do? You're not willing to act on it. It seems to me it means nothing at all except "please feel as if what other people is do is your fault so we can all feel like we're together (happy face)". Which is not something I'm going to take seriously in the least.
There's no likelihood of anything. You are something or you aren't. Something is or it isn't. There's no such thing as probability given that. That's a very real, old, and valid philosophical stance, and if that's one's position your conjecture about environmental determinism functioning around likelihood of circumstances is irrelevant - people are who they are. They're not who they're not. And none of that is determined by their environment.
Saying
>had his family been a nice middle class nuclear family in the safe suburbs who drove him to chess club, he may have turned out an entirely different man
is the equivalent of saying "if he was a different person he'd be a different person", which is rubbish in that it tells you absolutely nothing important. *Of course* if someone weren't oneself they wouldn't be oneself.
>Could I have an example?
A woman who lives with her boyfriend who is a previously convicted felon overhears him talking about wanting to murder another man constantly. He asks her some time to go through the process of getting a gun. She does. One day he storms into the home asking for the gun and yelling about how he's going to kill that man. cont-
>>81058078
yes, a man is responsible for protecting his family.
if a nigger rapes his niece, that means he has failed to protect his family.
he is not guilty of the crime. the nigger is. but he is guilty of failing to protect his family.
regarding drugs: drug dealers bring misery and degeneracy to society for the sake of making money. their activity has a big negative impact on society, and serves as a catalyst for a ton of other antisocial and criminal behavior. punishing them harshly is a just cause.
>>81066032
>>81064310
Testimony is unclear about what exactly happens next, but a grand jury (say this case came to them after an appeals process convicting the women of being an accessory of murder) finds sufficient grounds for the charge and the women is sentenced to prison. She did not "ultimately make the decision" to kill anyone. The man did. She's still punished.
>>81066338
>yes, a man is responsible for protecting his family
So I'm responsible for the death of my father during my undergrad years at the hands of a thug sixty miles away. Is that right?
Having inferior penises
>>81052500
>killing all Muslims Christians and Jews
>bad
>>81052500
Killing gook drug users is fine b/c ant people are replaceable cogs
Killing white drug users is immoral b/c even white druggies have potential and worth
>>81052500
Torturing your food right before you eat it to heighten the sensations you feel as you eat it's freshly killed carcass
>>81066654
nigger stop trying to jew us. we both know that you know exactly what we're talking about.
Eating dogs.
Stepping on puppies & kittens with high heals.
>>81066654
Yep. Kill yourself tripfag
>>81061291
>forced to give up money to gangs =/= give gangs money for illicit substances
potheads really are this retarded
>>81052500
>a nigger is alive, and then he gets killed
>bad
>>81066032
>You can't judge intent. You're existentially incapable.
We need not be, only reasonably certain.
> It seems to me it means nothing at all except "please feel as if what other people is do is your fault so we can all feel like we're together (happy face)". Which is not something I'm going to take seriously in the least.
But it's true; everyone is influenced by their environment, and everyone else is part of the environment. People are not atoms, they are not islands; they just aren't.
>There's no likelihood of anything. You are something or you aren't. Something is or it isn't.
Sure it is, at least when taken according to other data. Does anyone grow up knowing that they will commit a particular crime? Are people perfectly rational beings, with no element of probability or chance in their thought? Are men not subject to passion?
>is the equivalent of saying "if he was a different person he'd be a different person", which is rubbish in that it tells you absolutely nothing important. *Of course* if someone weren't oneself they wouldn't be oneself.
The concept of oneself is always in the past; you are constantly changing. Every new experience, every new memory, and every thought on that experience, on that memory, on that though, and on that thought and on that thought, changes who you are.
No one is destined to become a particular person, but their are most certainly likely paths of development that can be manipulated as too avoid unfortunate states of mind.
>She did not "ultimately make the decision" to kill anyone. The man did. She's still punished.
She still made the decision to procure the gun for that man, knowing full well that he had the intent to kill that man, and that is enough to consider her an accomplice in his murder.
Also, there's something to be said about procuring a weapon for a known felon in itself, even if he had not made his intentions known.
>And none of that is determined by their environment.
>>81067519
>>81067476
Brilliance demonstrated.
>>81067564
It's right they're not equivalent, but the basis of what the guy is saying isn't that it's the drug users giving money that's bad, it's what the gangs are doing with it. Otherwise he'd have (and presumably you'd have) no objection with drug users buying from completely non-violent gangs.
thanks op, I now have a file in my computer called "chinkpepe"
>>81060901
Hey dipshit if weed is legal recreationally (which Emperor Trump has stated he will allow) it's funding the government and small businesses instead of violent games. Fucking double standards when mother fuckers still drink alcohol and claim other drugs to be intrinsically more degenerate. Grow up or get the fuck off /pol/ your cancer isn't needed here and I'm not going to allow you to spread your ignorance on this board of mainly good people intent on bettering society.
>>81067839
>Otherwise he'd have (and presumably you'd have) no objection with drug users buying from completely non-violent gangs.
Violent gangs aren't the problem, it's the drugs themselves and the attitudes they spread and foster amongst the population that is truly concerning.
>>81068364
Why is it good if it's for the sake of small business? It's still weed.
Also, alcohol is degenerate.
Also, >on this board of mainly good people intent on bettering society
>intent on bettering society
Hah
That being said, MAGA my brother.
>>81067709
You can't be reasonably certain. You're making a complete guess, which is anything *but* certain, and certainly not reasonable.
I have no relation to you. What you do is entirely your responsibility. I may choose to interact with you. You may choose to interact with me. Neither of us is obligated to, and when we're not interacting we can't even possibly have responsibility for what the other is doing.
I'll ask again - what is your "responsibility" even *doing*?
>Sure it is
I demonstrated that it isn't. Something is or isn't. Something will be or it won't be. Those are 100% tautological truths, and they leave no room whatsoever for the existence of any possibility outside true/false. Which means likelihood as a concept doesn't exist, since 100% or 0% don't allow for likelihoods, only certainties.
"The concept of oneself" is one's identity, and a person is identical only to that person's soul. Soul = identity = essence. A person is essentially oneself. The environment is irrelevant to identity.
>knowing full well that he had the intent to kill that man
Did she? What if she'd thought he was lying all along and that he'd never do it? That state of affairs would make your statement objectively false.
>>81052500
killing a Starcraft cheater
>>81068708
>Violent gangs aren't the problem
Kill first all who sells it!
Them when the market it's empty the drugadicts would return to normal.
>>81052500
I'm an Asian drug user. I barely consider weed a drug nowadays, I hope it gets legalized in the US soon. I really hope the western world doesn't get consumed by the backwardness of the Middle East or Asia.
I'm leaving to China for a few months for work. Christ, I hope they don't fucking kill me if they somehow pull a fucking microgram of grass off a shirt I didn't wash.
>>81068708
I can agree that recreation drugs are probably essentially degenerate but prohibition, and the modern era have essentially proved that banning weed or alcohol is extremely ineffective. Trump himself said "The war on drugs has failed miserably" There is a lot less degeneracy surrounding an activity that doesn't have to be done illegally in secret. If it was out in the open we would know the degenerates from the good people and we could openly shun them.
>being blatant ethnonationalists and not caring what minorities think
only israel comes close
>>81068958
This back and forth is really boring. The entire problem is that literally every response each of you has given has been filled with Strawman fallacy. C'mon son it's the top of /pol/ everytime you open it.
>>81068958
>You can't be reasonably certain. You're making a complete guess
I'm guessing you think that the entire legal system and that psychology is nothing more than a guess as well, then?
>I'll ask again - what is your "responsibility" even *doing*?
Hopefully fostering a sense of civic obligation of oneself to one's fellows and nation.
>I demonstrated ... won't be.
You assume that the universe is deterministic, which it is most likely not.
In any case, even if it was, something will be or won't be only from the perspective of an omniscient observer; from our perspective, the future is fluid and ever changing. Regardless if our actions are already set in stone in an attempt to change the future, from our perspective and our knowledge, we are writing our own future.
Wrong, a person is their mind; nothing more, and nothing less. They are their thoughts and memories, and all the little subconscious quirks that color those thoughts.
>A person is essentially oneself.
Only for that instant; a minute later they are a new person, so infinitesimally changed by new thought and new memory, and the person that existed a minute ago is nothing more than a memory.
New thought is, for the most part, derived from new experience. New experience comes from the environment.
A child is born in India, and is flown to either America or Japan. Would they be the same person when they grow up, in either possibility?
A man is at a fork in the road; on the left is a million dollars, and to the right is an extremely romantically compatible woman.
Is he the same man, a few years down the line, having chosen only one path?
>Did she? What if she'd thought he was lying all along and that he'd never do it?
Then that was a gross misstep in thought on her part, and if she can reasonably explain why she thought he was lying, then perhaps she can get off the hook for that.
Still doesn't change the fact that she procured a weapon for a felon, weather or not he killed someone.
>>81052500
The chinks got that one right.
You violate the law, the law violates you.
>>81069340
>Implying is a push and not a pull demand
Iñaqui pls
>>81069750
That's why we must target the demand for drugs, and not the supply of it.
Shunning isn't enough if someone doesn't care, because then they are still a potential influence on future, potential drug users.
>>81070266
Also, check em
>>81070444
Dayumm respect for trips. But what do you reccomend we do to end the degeneracy? I'm with the movement if you have an effective method of handling it.
>>81052500
>westerners criticize china after going after terrorists (literally bbqing them) for mass knife attacks and suppressing the muslim region of xinjiang.
>no fucking around with drugs dealers/smugglers
>Using authoritarian governments to improve economic conditions
>>81070737
Well, there is always what the Phillipinos are doing; execution, but I personally consider that a bit too heavy handed.
DARE was an example of what could have been done, except it was terribly mismanaged and just generally caused even more interest in drugs thanks to its retarded souther-sex-ed tier education.
A preferable solution would be to simply change peoples minds so that they don't want to do drugs; foster a culture that celebrates sobriety and rationality, rather than hedonism and new sensual experience.
That, however, falls under the purview of social engineering (if it's to be done in any effective manner), so that could ultimately also be considered as immoral as just straight up execution, depending on your viewpoint.
>>81070293
It is. You appealing to authority/tradition in trying to validate your faith in it won't do away with the objective fact that people can't make 100% certain judgements, and "the entire legal system and psychology" are just people making judgments. They may be right. They may be wrong. I won't put my faith in them because.
>Hopefully fostering a sense of civic obligation of oneself to one's fellows and nation
Ad hoc constructions aren't respected in philosophy for a reason. I think it's a manipulative lie to try and convince people they're responsible for what other people do when they simply aren't.
>You assume that the universe is deterministic
I don't have to assume anything for an a priori logical tautology to be true. Either A or not-A. It's true period.
Our perspective is irrelevant to truth. Utterly irrelevant.
>Wrong
Not wrong. A person is their soul and are essentially themselves. Their perspectives and memories are, once again, irrelevant.
>Then that was a gross misstep in thought on her part
"Gross misstep"? Really? What if the two men constantly hung out, were friendly, and bantered "Oh you faggot I'm gonna kill you hahahaha" constantly? What if they appeared to be best friends and she thought it all along that is was nothing more than a big joke? Is it only a "misstep" in hindsight? Consequentialist drivel.
>procured a weapon for a felon
Or she got it entirely for herself, and her boyfriend stole it from the case one night and neither she nor him wanted to admit it ;)
Either way - she's punished.
>>81072174
>You appealing to authority/tradition in trying to validate your faith in it won't do away with the objective fact that people can't make 100% certain judgements
You're right, they can't.
Have fun living in abstract objective philosophy land; I'll be out here in the real world.
>Ad hoc constructions aren't respected in philosophy for a reason.
Who says I was trying to be philosophically rigorous? I honestly don't give a shit about rationally derived philosophies, simply because they don't survive contact with the real world.
>I think it's a manipulative lie to try and convince people they're responsible for what other people do when they simply aren't.
People are responsible if they believe they are responsible, and it's up to them to decide whether they believe that or not, based on people like me and you trying to convince them otherwise.
It's more useful for people to believe they are responsible, and people in this case means everyone, including me.
>A person is their soul and are essentially themselves.
The soul doesn't exist. A person is their mind (or can be approximated as such), and is a constantly changing, malleable state of being. The self is not continuous, only infinitesimally fine.
>Is it only a "misstep" in hindsight?
Pretty much, and even then, I would believe she would be absolved of blaim. If she can reasonably prove herself, that is.
>Or she got it entirely for herself, and her boyfriend stole it from the case one night and neither she nor him wanted to admit it ;)
You think the police couldn't figure out if the safe was broken into or not?
You've retreated so far up your clean, perfect, philosophical ass that you've forgotten what reality is like, and what people are like.
You do know that cows aren't spherical, correct?
>>81057218
stop chewing on johnson
>>81073277
>why don't you have faith in other people
>"because they're idiots"
>lol have fun living in philosophy land xD
So convincing.
>Who says I was trying to be philosophically rigorous?
Not me ever.
>I honestly don't give a shit about rationally derived philosophies
And I don't give a shit about sentimentalist collectivist commie guilt-driven dumbfuckery. I figured this would be a waste of time, and I figured correctly - collectivists *hate* logic. Bye.
>>81073987
>So convincing.
Too bad, son, you're gonna have to be dealing with people for the rest of your life. Better to think of ways to mitigate their stupidity than pretending they aren't stupid.
>Not me ever.
Neither did I
>And I don't give a shit about sentimentalist collectivist commie guilt-driven dumbfuckery.
Thankfully, people with the same mindset of you are rare. It'd be shame to see what becomes of humanity if everyone were so selfish and cynical as you.
>commie
How rude.
Have a good night, tripfag.
>>81054448
Affects my etire country men
>>81074824
I find it just a little bit sad that I'm assumed to be selfish just because I don't pretend I'm responsible for what other people do. As if there's any connection between those things whatsoever. As if it's somehow less ego-centric *NOT* to philosophically inject the relevance of your life into *EVERY OTHER HUMAN BEING'S* by pretending you're responsible for what they do than to accept that you can only be responsible for what you do and other people can only be responsible for what they do.
Collectivism is so abhorrently toxic.
>>81052500
>>81052500
I just had a couple DMT sessions. I want to do the opposite of kill you.
>>81054079
Perhaps they're just driving out the competition?
>>81075729
>As if there's any connection between those things whatsoever.
You're not responsible for what they do, but we are all, in part, responsible for the environment that produced the mind that had those thoughts and did those actions.
>Collectivism is so abhorrently toxic.
How so? I find it beautiful; a desire to not only be responsible for ourselves, but also our countrymen; to raise each other up, to bring others to new heights, out of a sense of civic duty and moral obligation.
Say all you want about "you can only be responsible for yourself"; if the people believe they are responsible for each other, then they are responsible for each other. A philosophy only matters if you accept the premises behind it, which thankfully many people don't in regards to yours.
>>81071314
All this just to keep someone from getting high. Surely there's nothing you're trying to keep hidden, my trusted rabbi...
>>81076628
I'm a bit wary after psychedelics caused an entire generation to do a complete 180 on their politics, Chaim.
In fact, I'm a bit wary of all mind-altering recreational substances.
Have you ever considered that just maybe I care about my fellow people, and want to see them be better?
>>81076296
>which thankfully many people don't in regard to mine
“Love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you.”
“Do not use force against an evil man.”
“Do not resist evil with evil.”
“Do not return evil for evil.”
“Overcome evil with good.”
“Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave room for the wrath of God; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.’”
Yeah, it's totally great that people don't follow these tenets. What an awful place the world would be if they did.
I believe in God giving me an obligation to be good to others. It's an absolute, outward morality. But here's what makes it fundamentally better than yours - it doesn't foster a sense that someone's actions aren't entirely their own. It doesn't take away *ANY* of the moral reponsibility one has for one's own actions. And it doesn't put force burdens on *other people* to reciprocate your goodness to them at all - you're obligated to be good and what other people do is *irrelevant* in regard to your moral imperative. You owe God everything, and God says "be good to everyone else" so you do it.
>>81052500
Eating dogs. You savages.
Dogs have been our companions for thousands of years.
They protect our homes from intruders, will defend us with their lives, are intelligent and utterly loyal. My dog is asleep just now in my kids' room. She'll wake them up for school by gently putting her paws on them.
How can you people eat dogs?
>>81052500
Hey, pass me that crystal meth, bruh
>>81052500
Would drinking alcohol count as using a drug? Would I be punished in Gookland for drinking? I thought you fuckers loved drinking even more than the Irish
>>81060962
Those A1's
>>81077107
Ah, but here's the thing.
I don't believe in God.
Goodnight, tripfag.
>>81078106
Collectivists generally don't.
Goodnight, commie.
>>81078106
>>81078417
Fuck commie scum. Capitalism can cater to the needs of all, Communism can cater to the needs of only the collective.
>>81078417
>>81078689
Not a commie though, famalams; I'm fully in support of market economies.
Hey Asians
>getting cocky and telling others about it
>bad
>>81079239
You also want people to feel responsible for a nigger killing a nigger in Chicago. And if that's the case, you ought to want mo money fo dem programs.
So again - goodnight, commie.
>>81060828
Whites don't make less. That's only you.
>>81079518
I want them to feel ashamed and responsible for creating a nation in which niggers kill niggers in the first place, I know I sure am.
Also, welfare a shit if given to people who won't do anything with it.
For someone who is so supposedly philosophically learned, you seem to quickly resort to personal attacks and petty insults as soon as someone doesn't recognize your oh-so-glorious genious.
Are you going to start spamming smug anime girls now?
>>81078689
oh, and MAGA btw
>>81053966
agreed
>>81079239
When you believe in collectivism, you are playing into Marxism. Accept individuality or leave. We do not tolerate commie scum. If you actually would address problems as individual cases rather than collective cases, we'd take you seriously.
>>81081376
>insults
>having anything to do with arguments
I'm insulting you because I think you ought to be shamed for subscribing to a toxic ideology - I don't expect it to work but on the off chance it might I'm going to do it anyway. It has nothing whatsoever to do with any argument.
You're not dishonest/completely unaware of what you're actually supporting/saying to warrant cute anime girl images. Those are reserved for a different breed of people than you.
>>81082275
Individuals are a result of the collective; addressing problems as individual cases is only treating the symptom; I seek to treat the disease.
In any case, humans operate as individuals only in the hypothetical case; we are not islands, and no matter how much you meme about "freedom(tm)" and the like, we will not be.
In any case, I'd probably be the first up to shoot communist faggots, simply because of how terrifyingly inefficient their economic model is; I hold no sympathy for idealogues who ruin their nation.
The same goes for an-caps and other hyper-individualist cunts.
>>81082517
>I'm insulting you because I think you ought to be shamed for subscribing to a toxic ideology
I could honestly say the same thing to you; I find it horrifyingly lazy to trust in the blind processes of nature/God/whatever, and with no guarantee or mechanism by which to ensure a sufficiently good future,
>>81082792
"Collectives" are the result of individuals. Without individuals, there can be no [arbitrary number of individuals >1]. Without [arbitrary number of individuals >1], the same cannot be said of individuals. Individuals are the fundamental unit, and are ultimately what you deal with. You don't deal with collectives - you deal with (or you don't) numbers of individuals.
>>81083248
You think *you* have a *GUARANTEE* of a "sufficiently good future"? And you say *I* live in a dream land?
>>81083328
Are there no mountains because they are formed of rocks?
A collective being nothing more than a set of individuals does nothing to argue against its usefulness as a sociological concept.
To deal with a collective is to deal with a great number of people at once.
To move a mountain is to move a great number of rocks at once.
>>81083447
Not a 100% guarantee, but certainly more than trusting in divine plan or in nature's blind flailing.
>>81083764
There's no usefulness to the terms "society", "collective", or any of those unqualifiable terms.
They're actually the opposite of useful - they're psychologically toxic, in that they're used as an excuse for personal responsibility.
"Ayo it wunnit hiz fault - da sysem is wuz broken!"
>>81083846
>certainly more than trusting in divine plan
I'd love to see you substantiate that claim.
>>81082792
You are so fucking backwards in your thinking. You do realize that dealing with individuals in terms of their collectives is shit that the Khmer Rouge did, right?
I hate to put down a fellow commie-hater, but your thinking pattern is just so close to theirs.
>>81083969
Really now? Silly me, apparently grouping people into abstract organization with a clear authority and set of rules to abide by isn't a multiplier for productivity, safety, and general happiness!
>"Ayo it wunnit hiz fault - da sysem is wuz broken!"
No, it is always his fault, stop strawmanning; his environment and his life did lead him to the state of mind where he would even have to contemplate that decision (and chose poorly), but the system didn't force him to.
The system is only "broken" in that it can be optimized such to reduce the probability of another individual having to make the decision of whether or not to break the law.
Also, I thought you were going to bed, tripanon :^)
>>81084032
I'd love for you to show me there's a divine plan in the first place.
>>81084167
>X did Z
>Y did Z
>therefor X is Y!
Dealing with individuals in terms of collectives is also pretty much what every civilization in the history of all mankind, except for perhaps small hunter-gatherer tribes and early villages, you know.
Did you know that Joseph Stalin drank water?
>>81060962
>tiocfaidh
How do you pronounce that?
Toas-faad?
>>81083764
>Are there no mountains because they are formed of rocks?
What the fuck is that supposed to mean? If you removed all rocks from existence, then there would be no mountains made of rock. If you removed all Muslims, then there would be no Muslim problem. Your analogy is something that I should be saying to you.
>>81052500
>we yellows
Nice try John.
>>81084380
It's not. It's objectively toxic. Individual responsibility is how vibrant morality are instilled in people - when you say stupid shit like
>his environment and his life did lead him to the state of mind where he would even have to contemplate that decision
you take away from his responsibility. You tell him 'the system failed you' at the same time you tell him he failed whoever by doing whatever he did. You take away his agency and shift some - even if it's a *TINY* portion it's still toxic - of the responsibility for what he did onto others, and expect them to feel some sort of guilt for it. It's disgusting Marxist shit.
You said you were going to bed first. I said "bye" and then you kept responding - I didn't say I was going anyway.
>>81084632
I'll do it after you show me your senses correspond to real objects.
>>81084824
What the fuck are you even getting at?
My point is that even though mountains are formed of rocks, and not a "real thing" in their own right (in fact we could keep going down the chain to minerals, molecules, atoms, and fundamental particles), we still consider mountains as an entity, and are treated as such.
Also, I don't disagree with you in regards to the Muslims.
>>81084930
>It's not. It's objectively toxic. Individual responsibility is how vibrant morality are instilled in people - when you say stupid shit like
>objectively
>Individual responsibility is how vibrant morality are instilled in people
That sounds a lot like an opinion to me, fampai.
>you take away from his responsibility
It was always his responsibility, but it was the systems failure for producing an individual that would even do such an action.
Nature produces lions, and yet the lion is still responsible for killing men, and is killed in turn, even if the lion was acting on instinct. It's just what you do.
I am arguing that we should be ashamed that our system produces lions in the first place, but this takes no responsibility away from criminals who act.
> It's disgusting Marxist shit.
No, it's pragmatic! It is to think "it is a shame that our society has produced such a person, and that we had to put him down although he could have been a productive citizen in another life. Let us change the system such that it is more likely people like him will become productive citizens".
>>81085022
I can't, I just find it useful to believe that they do, and prefer to do so anyways.
>>81085038
Okay, so what we're saying here is that we need to remove kebab.
Still, dealing with individuals as collectives is what BLM are doing to cops. They've built this horrifying strawman for all police and because of that, we're going to see more cop-killings like that happened in Dallas. A lot of blacks actually believe that cops are going to shoot them for no reason, and this fear will only lead to violence if we decide to deal with problems collectively rather than individualistically.
The media's also played a hand in this, but that's a whole issue in itself.
>>81085518
Since what God establishes is objectively true, and God judges you for what *you* do and not what anyone else does, lying to people (which is sin and thus toxic) is thus objectively toxic.
Pretty easy fampai.
>It was always his responsibility, but
No. Not 'but'. But nothing. There is no "system". You're shifting blame to something that doesn't even exist.
Nothing about it is pragmatic. It's counterproductive to vigorous morality to insinuate people aren't fully responsible for their actions. Which you are - if someone is 100% responsible for something, no one else can partake of the responsibility of that something. There cannot be 105% responsibility for an action distributed among people. If someone is 99.999999% responsible for something and you redistribute even that tiny fraction to other people, *you downplay their responsibility in what THEY and NOT ANYONE ELSE did*.
>I can't
I know you can't. I find God useful to believe and prefer to do so anyways.
>>81085778
>Okay, so what we're saying here is that we need to remove kebab.
Only as a side note; the main point is that something being a collection of smaller units does not make that collection any less useful to consider its own thing.
And to the contrary, the only way to deal with that problem is collectively. All police ought to be held to the same standards, and police often turn corrupt because of the opportunities provided to them to do so by the structure of law enforcement itself.
If you are to eliminate corrupt cops (and thus assuage the fears of niggers), your must do more than simply removing corrupt cops; you must modify or remove the systems and mechanisms by which corrupt cops are created.
Throwing gays with molotovs
>>81086219
Hello upside-down Poland.
>>81086043
>Since what God establishes is objectively true
Which God?
What if I don't believe in God?
What if I don't care what God says until he sends down a choir of angels to beat some sense into me?
>You're shifting blame to something that doesn't even exist.
Let the collective known as "society" exist, and let us treat it as a entity. Fiat Lux.
>Nothing about ... ELSE did*.
Last time I checked, society doesn't coerce niggers to kill. It only creates niggers such that they are willing to kill.
Niggers that kill must be killed, and society must be fixed such that it does not produce murderous niggers.
By insisting that it's all on the singular individual, you attack only the symptom; you'll be killing murderous niggers until the end of time.
By acknowledging that there may be something else going on, and fixing that something else can stem the tide of murderous niggers, you can do more than just killing murderous niggers.
And you know what, fine. If I have to shift a little bit of responsibility from the nigger to society, so be it, even if makes the nigger a little less responsible.
That 99.99% responsibility is still enough for him to be executed for murder.
>>81086163
>does not make that collection any less useful to consider its own thing
It doesn't have to, given it's already useless in its own right.
>>81052500
Don't forget eating dogs.
>>81086630
>It doesn't have to, given it's already useless in its own right.
To you, perhaps.
Me and lots of other people find it useful, and so we shall consider it to be a thing.
>>81086606
It doesn't matter if you believe or care that 1+1=2. It is.
>Let the collective known as "society" exist
I don't have the authority to allow something that doesn't exist to be allowed into existence - sorry senpai.
"Society" doesn't do anything, because "society" doesn't exist.
>That 99.99% responsibility is still enough for him to be executed for murder
Thank you for admitting your morality takes away responsibility from people's actions that they would otherwise have without believing your malarkey.
>>81056685
What is this magical blob called "society" that can be affected without any discrete individual being affected?
>eating dogs
>>81086811
You can't name a use it serves you. Unless you count shitposting or self-reinforcing the ideology you poise around it being true anyway.
>>81086937
>Eating out dogs
oh wait that's Canada
>>81086888
>It doesn't matter if you believe or care that 1+1=2. It is.
Only because that is the result by which the rules of mathematics are set up.
>I don't have the authority to allow something that doesn't exist to be allowed into existence - sorry senpai.
That's okay, we can just play a game of pretend.
>Thank you for admitting your morality takes away responsibility from people's actions that they would otherwise have without believing your malarkey.
Hey, if it gets rid of murderous niggers for good, I really don't give a shit.
>>81086936
Sorry, I meant another individual directly.
Of course affecting society will effect individuals.
>>81087036
Sure it can; we can all consider ourselves part of the same collective, and so collectively act against people outside of the collective.
Government is pretty much the go-to example of the collective being useful.
>>81086163
It isn't about corrupt cops, it's about the way we deal with problems. Cops who actually shoot people without cause are jailed or fired depending on the circumstances, which is decided upon in a fair trial.
Now, let's imagine what we'd do if we dealt with it collectively. If we dealt with it collectively, a single cop shooting a kid for no reason would have his entire department burned to the fucking ground. Why should many pay for the actions of one?
>>81087609
>Now, let's imagine what we'd do if we dealt with it collectively. If we dealt with it collectively, a single cop shooting a kid for no reason would have his entire department burned to the fucking ground. Why should many pay for the actions of one?
Where in the ever living fuck did you get that situation from?
In any case, where did that one corrupt cop come from?
Why did he do what he did?
Can the structure or vetting process of law enforcement be changed to reduce the likelihood of another such officer?
>>81052500
No I agree. White people used to do that to a degree too, they just became liberalised.
Anything to get me from stopping my bad habits.
(though only the occasional spliff)
>>81054448
>someone does something that has no impact on you whatsoever
>>81087384
>Only because
Either A or not-A.
I'm not going to pretend something toxic is real my senpai senpai.
It does the opposite of get rid of murderous niggers. It makes more murderous niggers who "blame da racyiss sysem" for how they turned out. *Exactly* what you're promoting is why BLM thrives - the exact same kind of Marxist collectivist drivel.
>we can all consider ourselves part of the same collective
That's a dis-use, not a use. Individuals can hold that they share alot in common with other individuals and work together with them to accomplish something - and they can do that without the toxic shit that comes with collectivism.
>>81060962
jesus dude how do you pronounce that
>>81088083
>I'm not going to pretend something toxic is real my senpai senpai.
That's why I'm an atheist :^)
>It does the opposite of get rid of murderous niggers. It makes more murderous niggers who "blame da racyiss sysem" for how they turned out.
Well for one, that's why you don't let whatever you're trying to fix have a say in the redesign of the system.
Two, they're still the ones that killed. They're still the ones who are going to die for killing.
Wanting to change the system so that there are less of them won't change this.
>That's a dis-use, not a use. Individuals can hold that they share alot in common with other individuals and work together with them to accomplish something - and they can do that without the toxic shit that comes with collectivism.
Voluntary collectives are unstable and ultimately volatile; people on the average are not perfectly rational, and sometimes they just need to be forced to do something by their betters.
>>81087959
>heroine addict ODs under a bridge, body falls into a river, drifts out to sea and gets eaten by fish
>"Fuckin' drug users ruinin' me life m8"
Straya.
>>81088486
>That's why I'm an atheist
You have no trouble believing other illogical unqualifiable drivel - isn't that double-think? ;^)
>the redesign of the system
There's no "system" to redesign. You're quite literally incapable of telling us what a "system" is - where a "system" starts and where a "not-system" ends ;^)
>voluntary collectives
Collectivists really do love violence ;^)
>>81052500
Half of America actually admires the decision though
>>81054738
Founded no, evolved to yes
IRA tuturned into faggots and let Nationalism and solidarity die in Ireland and now it's an SJW liberal shithole full of shitskins
>>81088824
rude ;^)
The system is the collection of all people who believe themselves to be a part of it, in this case, those living in the currently defined territory of the united states and citizens under the jurisdiction of the united states government ;^)
there is literally nothing wrong with coercion ;^)
>>81088524
>no economic impact
>no impact on family
>no impact on the status quo of society at all (such as morals)
Anon, kys.
>>81060962
Fuck the IRA
Wasted their chance
>>81089219
>The system is the collection of all people who believe themselves to be a part of it, in this case, those living in the currently defined territory of the united states and citizens under the jurisdiction of the united states government ;^)
But wait, I don't believe I'm part of it, yet I'm pretty sure when you say
>those living in the currently defined territory of the united states and citizens under the jurisdiction of the united states government
you include me. So which do you not actually mean?
>The system is the collection of all people who believe themselves to be a part of it
or
> those living in the currently defined territory of the united states and citizens under the jurisdiction of the united states government
;^)
>>81089234
Heroine user made his own heroine from scratch, all his family died long ago and no one ever knew he was alive, and no one knew of his existence and he died alone.
>"Fuckin' addict cunts m8 they're worse'n sober abos I swear"
Straya.
>>81089219
Also
>there is literally nothing wrong with coercion
That *DOES* warrant an anime girl.
>>81089502
Since you don't believe you're part of it, you can't be a citizen since only citizens are a part of the collective.
By saying you do not want to be part of the collective, you implicitly revoke your citizenship, and therefor aren't part of the collective even though you're on its land.
That does, however, make you a foreign agent ;^)
>>81090040
shit taste desu, but because it's 2:15, I must unfortunately be off.
Have fun being wrong, Prace-kun :^)
>>81090496
>By saying you do not want to be part of the collective, you implicitly revoke your citizenship, and therefor aren't part of the collective even though you're on its land
You worked for these anime girls.
Bye bye~
>>81087755
>where did that one corrupt cop come from?
>Why did he do what he did?
>Can the structure or vetting process of law enforcement be changed to reduce the likelihood of another such officer?
And now we're thinking a little more individualistically. The end questions are the same, but the means of reaching the end is different. It is important that we look at situations like this from individuals to the institutions and not just start throwing blame on the institutions from the beginning. If the individual is an outlier, then there's not much that can be done to the institution. However, if the individual is highly representative of the institution, then said institution's problems need to be evaluated.
I was being hyperbolic with burning down police stations, I'm just making the point that the collective doesn't necessarily need to pay for the actions of the few.
For any casual observers, do you require what's absurd about
>By saying you do not want to be part of the collective, you implicitly revoke your citizenship, and therefor aren't part of the collective even though you're on its land
to be explained to you? Or is it as obvious as I think it should be?
>>81091747
The best part of big words and official-sounding prose is that you can get anyone to believe that something you said was true. Thomas Sowell was just so happy pointing that out about Obambo.
>>81052500
fuck u chinkistein I'm smoking legal weed
>>81093158
That would include me too though. RIP. It's hard to change your writing style when you've grown up reading antiquated shit, and then keep reading more antiquated shit as an adult.
Why would you kill drug users? That' not a very profitable scheme?
>>81093745
For feels, obviously.
>>81093745
Purge drug users
FOR FUN
Perhaps some physiological differences between our bodies make it so we just enjoy it way less than whitey and niggey
Thoughts\facts?
>>81093514
All I read is antiquated shit. In fact, I even listen to antiquated shit. I just think keeping it simple is more genuine. People understand what you're saying and, in the end, like you more.
