This is an absurd anti-philosophy that sociopathic midwits think is profound.Might is might and right is right. You may need might to enforce your vision of what is right but this does not equate the two.You know what else you'll need to enforce your vision of what is right? Oxygen. Does Oxygen "make right"? Technically, in an extremely abstract sense, it does but nobody would mistake "Oxygen makes right" for some profound axiom, true as it may be.Furthermore "right" is presumably a statement of truth. Equating truth with the ability to project force is a fundamental rejection of the very nature of understanding or the existence of ethics. If a shark kills a mathematician, is the shark now smarter and more in tune with truth than they were? It's moronic.Lastly, it's not an ideology can can inspire true loyalty. It subtly plants the seed of its own destruction. If you actually believe MMR, then you proactively morally justify your own hypothetical defeat because, were it to happen, your own ideology would demand you respect it no matter how depraved the people who beat you are.
>>540741567>If you actually believe MMR, then you proactively morally justify your own hypothetical defeat because, were it to happen, your own ideology would demand you respect it no matter how depraved the people who beat you are.exactly, great post
>>540741567There is no absolute right, there is only might to enforce what you think is right.
>>540741567Oh no. It’s like having morality derived from a divine text to avoid situations like this wasn’t thought of millennia ago
>>540741652Ty anon, I've been mulling it over a while
>>540741567Correct. It is also anatural. In nature, masses of weak creatures always defeat a strong creature.Humans enslaved elephants. Ants are capable of killing very large bugs.The law of the nature is not that the weak fear the strong, but that there is true strength in numbers and wit
>>540742136>>540741567Board of retards
>>540741567
>>540741895>there is no absolute rightYes there is. Reciprocity.Hypocrisy is the root of all wrongs.Also, ask me how I know you're brown.
>>540741567Oxygen is worse than Zyklon-B. Oxygen actually caused a planetary mass genocide.
>>540742535Explain how reciprocity is an absolute right.Are we going to be genocided by the cows because we've been eating them for so long? Reciprocity right?Or do rights only apply to humans and not other beings?
Once the world is all white, then we can talk. Until then it's politics by other means.
>>540742535Is nature "wrong" then? Cause reciprocity isn't something that occurs in nature. You don't see predators taking turns with prey to be dinner.
>>540741567creating a morality that you impose on the strong so that they wouldnt hurt the weak is the amoral. it is that the weak must be made stronger. this democratizes power. democratic societies are more stable and last longer.
>>540742924If the strong are actually strong, how can the weak impose their will on them? Seems like its just delusion.
>>540742792Reciprocity is the defining quality of "absolute right" not "an absolute right". Just "Absolute Right" as a definite principle. Read mroe carefully. And yes, you would be eaten by a lion, and no it would not be wrong to do so. Whether farming cows is wrong is an interesting question. It depends on how the cow conceives of it, but it probably is wrong. In any case, were the cow to come to the same level of understanding as you, and were you to not wish to be farmed, then yes it would certainly be wrong.
>>540742893No, nature is not right or wrong. Reciprocity is an activity of consciousness.>You don't see predators taking turns with prey to be dinner.Correct.
>>540743041Wrong how? What are the consequences of being wrong?
>>540742219>>540742304No argument
>>540743096The consequences of being wrong are that you would not be able to appeal to other conscious moral entities in your defense. It is an unshareable state.
>>540741567Might makes right is a misnomer. The point is you can impose your own morality on others if you are stronger than them. This is obvious. Nobody literally believes you should adopt the morality of your opponent if they are stronger than you. Also, might makes right is apparently wrong as evidenced by the slave morality that dominates countries that are enamoured by abrahamism.
>>540743149You can appeal to entities that share your own version of right and wrong.And the version of right and wrong that survives is based upon might.Not everyone believes in reciprocity.
>>540743234>Nobody literally believes you should adopt the morality of your opponent if they are stronger than youI see a lot of that on this board though
>>540743003>If the strong are actually strong, how can the weak impose their will on them?Convince the strong that their strength itself is evil and weakness is holy.
>>540743323There are lots of non-whites on here. You can ignore them.
>>540741567>anti-philosophygood, philosophy is for pederasts and charlatans
>>540743293Then what would you call the underlying principle which adjudicates any appeal?To not believe in reciprocity is practically suicide, so I would tend to doubt your claim.
>>540741567Might determines what is right.
>>540743414agreed 1000%
>>540741567It isn't anti-philosophy. It is a true statement.As Nietzsche wrote "I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws.".If you have no power your morality, your philosophy, your ideas are worthless.Of course you can have no power but your ideology you speak can have some and you can be spared by barbarian who had power like in China where Yelu Cucai said to Mongolian Khan: "Although you inherited the Chinese Empire on horseback, you cannot rule it from that position" and he was spared and made an advisor. But still you are under someone who has more power and whose might made right and this right was to let you live and do your job.
>>540743435The underlying principle that adjudicates any appeal is mutual self-interest.Reciprocity isn't in everyone's self-interest.
>>540743072>>540743041Lion wouldn't hesitate to eat the last human. It would still be wrong to reciprocate and kill the last lion. >were the cow to come to the same level of understanding as you, and were you to not wish to be farmed, then yes it would certainly be wrong.A baby doesn't have the same understanding as you, but it experiences terror, feels pain, and wants to live just like animals.Nature and existence is just endless suffering. The predator isn't wrong because if it doesn't cause the prey to die horribly, it and its children will die horribly of starvation. I think the wrongness is in unnecessarily inflicting suffering when you could chose not too. Hence why the cow doesn't need to share understanding, sharing suffering is adequate reason to make farming them wrong.
>>540743003there are forms of emotional manipulation and classical conditioning
>>540743732While that advisor was weak physically, he was still strong enough mentally. He knew how to tax people well which meant more money for Genghis which is always good.So maybe he didn't have might but he still had a lot of bargaining power. If he didn't know how to make money, he would have been killed in a second.
>>540742304So this okay right?
>>540741567Only an utter moron would earnest believe there is some profound truth in this MMR. It is actually an argument against the concept of morality at all. If you believe murder is wrong and I don't there is no way to prove either case, it comes down to simply who can muster more force to enforce their perspective. Ergo MMR. Neither case is proven at all - because they can't be because morality is bullshit.Of course there is no objective morality. Everyone from the past was 'evil' by today's standards because they supported slavery/colonialism/racism/sexism/whatever. And by the same token everyone today will be viewed as 'evil' by future generations because we support eating animals/capitalism/whatever do people seriously not get this?As soon as someone says 'you can't judge people from the past by today's standards' you are admitting that there is no objective morality. Nevermind the fact that if there is objective morality, who is determining it? And what if you disagree with them?
>>540743138
>>540741895remove compromise and suddenly absolute right will appear (and will be extremely antisemite)
>>540743940You miss the point completely. When Kirk's killer goes into the courtroom he won't be able to argue that murder is ok and he hasn't done anything wrong because the morality that murder is not ok has been enforced on him by society. The judge has already decided that murder is wrong and this is enforced by the state. - MMR.
>>540741567Everybody I've ever seen advocate for a lower age of consent is morally absolutist as fuck though. Many atheists also have their own rigid moral code. This is fucking retardation.
>>540743940Oh noes!They killed the controlled opposition christshill gatekeeper, so sad! :c Still feeling an immense amount of Schadenfreude about pro-LGBT leftists and cultural marxists totally losing their credibility with normies over it
>>540743342>>540743889If the strong are so weak in their convictions they can't even convince themselves that they're not evil, let alone the rest of the world, then its fair to say they aren't right and probably never were, and their might didn't make them so.
>>540741567Nigger your right is literally being dictated by another entity (government) because it has might
>>540741567The only people that don't practice moral relativism are religious fanatics retard. Go hang up with fanatic jihadists, they are the type that shares your views.
>>540744006It's erroneous to fall into this frame of "objective" morality. Why not do it for everything else? Why not qualify everything you stated there as "objective moron" or "objective truth" or "objective concept"?There is no point to the word "objective" in this context and to use it is to lose the frame already. Everything that goes through the subject ultimately relies on the object so in some sense it is objective and in a different sense it's subjective. There's absolutely no point whatsoever to use this term it's just something moralists do in an attempt to make their position sound based because they used the word "objective". Instead of using that word people should reframe it as "determined" morality.I agree with your position but I think you lose the debate because you sound like a freak who is going against "the objective" while the other guy sounds based because he is defending "Da Truth". Get what I mean?
>>540744018There is natural law to morality. Cooperative trustworthy organisms do better in adverse conditions. Nature will select for it in many settings
Life is about killing your enemy along with their women and children. Any belief that makes you forget that is a failing one.Existence is an eternal struggle. Those who want to live will fight, and those who do not want to fight don't deserve to live.All life-forms exist in a constant struggle for territory and power. Genes compete to the death. Our choices will amount to nothing more nor less than survival or extinction. It is right to align ourselves with the divine forces of nature that created us, and to have faith in their processes for they amount to the future. Life values its own survival, which is not a universal principle because not all life-forms value the lives of others. That means survival has distinctly in-group and out-group differences as do all morals derived from it.It was always us or them. We exist on a finite planet in a finite galaxy. History is a zero-sum game of conquest and extermination. Any culture or civilization along the way counts for nothing if it gets in the way of survival.Nature does not reward homeostasis. You either impose your will upon others, or they impose their will on you. We either make sure they cease to exist, or else the failure to do so will be punished by our own death.Life is a period of grace for one to survive and interact with the world, resolve any contradictions, and emerge stronger from all of it without having compromised your genetic constitution. Evolved, but untamed.Politics bends to the conditions of biology and demography, every other factor is secondary if not irrelevant to political discourse.We are in a constant state of tribal and racial warfare. Genetic homogeneity is the single biggest predictor of survival.Man is his own god and the keeper of his own destiny. Noble by birth, master by choice, tyrant by need, ruler by right.
>>540744770Consciousness decoupled from sex and violence is sterile and masturbatory.All forms of violence are a quest for identity. Identity always comes with violence.Violence is will to live. To not be violent is to not be alive. If you are not alive, it's better to end your life with the final act of violence: suicide.Everything is enforced through violence; everything ultimately escalates to violence. Violence is the answer to everything; And yet violence alone does not solve anything, only killing does.Civilization is not antithetical to violence, civilization is a way to maximize violence. The purpose of civilization is to organize and consolidate violence, directing it towards a higher purpose.Our interests are not confined to morals and dichotomies. It is our duty to kill any and all enemies of our destiny. If violence does not work, then you are not using enough of it.The Law of The Jungle is The Law of The Universe.
>>540744631
>>540744178I'm not seeing the issue. >>540744311My government tells me my morals? >>540744006Maybe people in the past had worse morals
>>540743909Of course, you just proved that you have to have might or power, but if you do not have any power nor mental nor physical you can be killed in a second by someone who has it.
>>540744770>killing your enemy along with their women and childrenWhat a jewish thing to say. Wouldn't you add cattle to it?
>>540741567>You may need might to enforce your vision of what is right but this does not equate the twoThat is the whole point of the saying. As usual, some philosophizing bullshitter thinks he discovered hot water, meanwhile he doesn't even see the forest for the trees.
>>540745099yes, government all through history has governed their people. money has molded your life. money has dictated your morals.
>might makes right fags when a nigger robs them at gunpoint
>>540745244I disagree, I hate my government and everything it does
>>540745295That's what concealed carry is for
>>540741567Based.Moral relativism is the primary the satanic Epstein class keep people enslaved https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUDdOR618xE
>>540745169It's very goy-like to let jews live, let alone any other non-Whites, and it's very jew-like to say your enemies can't kill and exterminate you in return.Also, Judaism and Jewishness is a thousand reasons why you should hold still as the Jew attempts to kill you under the expectation that you to refute those reasons.
Does Might Makes Right automatically and directly lead to By Any Means Necessary? Because that's the one I hate the most.
>>540741567the caveat is that right makes might a lot of the time (not all of the time), so truth re-enters power politics.
>>540741567you lost tranny.
>>540741567>This is an absurd anti-philosophy that sociopathic midwits think is profound.It's an absurd anti-philosophy that nobody espouses. I have only ever seen it mentioned by people like you criticizing it, despite the fact that you're responding to literally nobody.This is just a big strawman.
>>540745569Jews already won though.
>>540745668If you say so. I see it every day trying to justify supporting you know who
>>540745451thats an interesting theory but i wasnt implying theres an argument to be made here. nowadays the government simply has to know you are alive.
>>540745668it's not a strawman. it's basically the philosophy of Hobbes and Schmidt
>>540744276>they can't even convince themselves that they're not evil? They weren't trying to. Evil as a metaphysical concept didn't exist before abrahamism.>then its fair to say they aren't right and probably never were, and their might didn't make them so.It's not fair to say that because it doesn't follow.
>>540743003If they can impose their will then they are not weak, they are strong. Don't see what the problem is here.
>>540745692According to christians.
>>540741567>t. an unmighty pleb
>>540744770Life exists in a state of equilibrium, nature prunes the misfits. The predators real enemy isn't other predators, it's the prey that it engages in life or death struggle with every day. It's the prey that's trying to make their cubs go hungry by not cooperating.The human struggle of weak vs strong is more a case of predator vs prey than predators competing for territory. MMR defenders are funny because they've deluded themselves into thinking they are part of the in-group when they try to morally justify the actions of the strong. The ruling class doesn't care that you also have pale skin, you're cattle to them no different than if you were brown or yellow. The west being economically hollowed out and flooded with migrants to the point of the white cattle crying out in pain is the rulers treating you with the same disregard that they treat the rest of the world with. You're defending the morality of your own enemy, and justifying their actions against you.
>>540746334I'm amused at how many non-argument replies my OP got. Sticks in your craw a bit to see seen so well, doesn't it?
>>540741567Applying might makes right on an individual basis is moronic. Applying it on a tribal basis is more or less inevitable.
>>540746505I fail to see how the calculus changes at scale
>>540746402life doesn't exist in a state of equlibrium. it is constantly being thrown of balance, species go extinct, new ones emerge... that doesn't even mention abiotic factors; volcanoes, climate changing etc etc.
>>540746549>>540741567The purpose of morality is to increase odds of survival of the genes. 'Might' sort of has a wrong connotation, but if y'all get killed your morality disappears with you. In other words if your morality doesn't give you a survival edge, it is unsuited to the environment, so it really should be that right makes might, if we're interpreting the terms loosely
>>540746819except morality is a meme and it can survive and even spread without your genetics surviving
>>540746819You could reduce this to "existence makes right" which is technically correct but not worth pointing out. I think it's quite apparent that the general use of MMR is supposed to mean people who seem to be getting what they want intrinsically are morally justified
>>540741567I agree with you, but I would add that "might makes right" should be considered descriptive rather than prescriptive. Shorthand for "the prevailing might can enforce what it asserts to be right regardless of alignment with any objective moral framework". Much of the time, "what is actually true" matters less to your well being and decision making than "what do the people around me believe to be true".
>>540746936ok but if it doesn't make them mighty, then it will just be a curse on them that weakens them
>>540745906>Hobbes and SchmidtOh yeah, very famous philosophers here on /pol/
>>540746994I don't like the term might makes right, but there's an element of truth to it. If you have two groups fighting to the death and one wins, there's some special sauce that gave them the edge. If we are humble we say, maybe they are right about something.
>>540741968Problem with that is that the text is dumb and filled with stupid errors, like not requiring you to kill the evil that you profess the despise.Honest evil is better than hypocritical cowardly (((good))).
>>540747181Winning is just winning, no more or less. Winning is not a statement of morality
>>540747181you're saying right makes might. that's the reversal that is partially true (not always true). It can be seen in technology for example. people who have cracked science have more powerful weapons, so by being "right" about the physical world they have more might.>>540747084i'm giving reading advice
An army is mighty, a tight family, unity across people and collaboration is mighty.People forget the absolute might of altruism, years of atomizing propaganda about being a "strong independent individual" makes idiots think this sentence somehow is about some sort of lone wolf just out there taking what is his.In reality it can apply to packs, to us all as a species and therefore might in indeed right.
>>540746549Because the whole is more than the sum of it's parts, many monkeys together strong. When you strip away the bullshit and the political facade you'll find that most interaction between tribes and polities is amoral. Violence or the threat of violence is the norm and no one weak tribe is allowed to live as they will purely out of any sort of moral consideration. Nobody bows to American hegemony because the kikes in Washington are moral, they bow because they have no choice. Morality is the glue that holds a society together, it rarely factors into relations between societies.
>>540747347Exactly, conflict is amoral. Winning a conflict isn't a statement of superior morals. That's why I reject MMR
>>540741652>you proactively morally justify your own hypothetical defeat because, were it to happen, your own ideology would demand you respect it no matter how depraved the people who beat you are.First of all, there is a different between respecting vs. accepting. Second, the definition of "rights" (according to Merriam Webster) is "being in accordance with what is just, good, or proper." The "or" in that definition matters, because it basically means that a "right" action or event doesn't need to be just, good, *and* proper. One could simply acknowledge certain outcomes are "proper," but not necessarily "good" from a moral perspective. Keep in mind the concept of Might Makes Right was popularized by Ragnar Redbeard, who was an overt White Supremacist. He wouldn't argue that nonWhites overtaking a White society is "morally correct," but he would say (likely with reluctance) that it was "right" in the sense of "to the victor go the spoils." And yes, if any group refuses to do anything about their demise then they get what they deserve.
>>540741567Our defeat comes from our obsession with morality. Whilst everyone else is operating on might.
>>540745929>Evil as a metaphysical concept didn't exist before abrahamism.You're a complete NPC if you can't conceive evil without a jewish comic book explaining it. I keep hearing the phrase "suicidal empathy", it's the basis for this whole cope that the strong are still strong, and the weak are only imposing their will because the suicidal empathy of the strong made them vulnerable to ideological subversion. The ones in this camp expose the fact that they're sociopaths that don't even have a concept of empathy immediately when you talk to them, which really betrays their entire argument.The sociopaths find it inconceivable that normies can emotionally moved by horrific acts of callous cruelty--past and present--empathy is so alien to them that this normal reaction must be a psychological defect. >It's not fair to say that because it doesn't follow.Right and wrong is a concept of consciousness, it's not reflected in the natural world, the rightness or wrongness of things only exists in peoples consciousness. If everyone thinks something is reprehensible or "evil", then it is wrong.
>>540741567> Oxygen. Does Oxygen "make right"?Yes. Oxygen reacts with things in particular ways, is does not bend to your will, it does what physics demand.This is exactly what Might Makes Right is, it's an observation of nature and determining how behavior happens.When applied to organisms, might (soft and hard forms of power exertion) determine how certain behaviors emerge. A lions kills and eats a gazelle, it had the might and now has secured its right to the gazelle flesh. Especially if the same lion defends his catch from competitors. "Right" is not referring to correctness, it is referring to exclusive control/ownership/privilege within a behavioral ecosystem with other entities competing for resources. It is an observation of nature and how behavioral interactions occur.Nature is amoral. Your opinions are worthless if they can not be backed by might.
>>540747664
is persuasiveness a kind of might?
>>540747504Well you can reject it within your society but morality doesn't stop foreign bullets. You should definitely view foreign relations in terms of MMR. If you'd rather be peaceful and leave the foreigners alone, well that's swell. You better keep up in the big stick arms race and always keep your choice bludgeoning-branch at the ready just in case they don't agree. Nor should you let morality get in the way of doing what you need to in order to keep the tribe strong, if you weaken then you are at the mercy of outsiders, simple as. If you need to buttfuck the microtribe for a strategic scrap of land, then all you can do is afford them the mercy of using lube.
>>540747664We extend good will to people who don't reciprocate which i agree is a mistake but you must believe in reciprocity to begin to even recognize it as a mistake >>540747542What you're saying about ultimate outcomes of struggle is fair enough but the point I'm making is it's crazy to actually live by MMR and try to orient your behavior around your belief in it.
>>540746107Exactly. Losers emerging on the wrong side of history coping that past demonstrations of extremely violent chimpouts proves they're still strong, and the weak are only winning through tricks, but they're still weak.The fact is the formally strong are not so mighty anymore, and the formally weak have become stronger than them.
>>540743878>It would still be wrong to reciprocate and kill the last lion. It woupd not, if the last lion is a man eater. That's how hjmans wiped out saber toothed tigers
>>540741567What do you mean by "right"? Moral "rights" and "right" as in truth are different. In case of the former, morality exists in our genetic code, we feel good and justified about certain actions, and feel bad about others. This helped us form and maintain tribes. The tribe that spread it's genes the most dictates morality.
>>540747746>>540747838I agree might is necessary to exist but the point I want to make is that MMR should never be a component of one's decision making process so it's functionally worthless. MMR being a law of the universe in the background like gravity is one thing but I'm saying it should never be considered or applied by a human
>>540741567>right wing Mao said all power stems from the barrel of a gun, seething little retard.
>>540747905>but the point I'm making is it's crazy to actually live by MMR and try to orient your behavior around your belief in it.Nobody actually does this. Not even the author of MMR. It's similar to how nobody actually lives completely by the rules put forth in the bible. Everything is full of contradictions, and even Redbeard seemed to acknowledge this by promoting moral relativism while simultaneously having a black and white views towards certain topics. I'm guessing he would have probably argued that morals may fluctuate depending on circumstances involving survival, whether that survival involves your own life or a group collective.
>>540748207Schmidt and Hobbes nigger brain. read a book. there's power politics on both sides.
>>540748303I see people try to use derivatives of MMR to justify political decisions here every day
This is a spambot thread
>>540748516I've made this thread 1 other time months ago. People are enjoying the discussion. What's the issue? What awful thing am I shilling?
>>540748473Yeah, and you probably also see people using the bible to justify certain acts. Do you think they're living a 100% Christian lifestyle? The point is that nobody adheres to any religion or ideology totally by the book. The best anyone can do is abide by a belief (religious, political, etc) in a way that doesn't involve extreme contradictions on a regular basis.
>>540746605It does. It's not a static equilibrium, but systems gravitate towards a balanced state. Extinction is the fate of those who couldn't achieve balance. A predator that's so successful it hunts its prey to extinction can't exist. Herbivores that are too prolific starve. Even the climate is in a state of equilibrium: Higher temperatures cause more ocean evaporation, more clouds, resulting in lower insolation and lower solar heating; more CO2 increases plant productivity and sequestering of atmospheric carbon, especially combined with rising temps when considering that a disproportionate amount of landmass is at high latitudes.Cataclysmic events like volcanos, meteorite impacts, etc. are not the norm, and catastrophically disrupt the equilibrium, causing mass chaos and extinction. Humans have the capability to deliberately inflict the chaos of events that normally only occur on the scale of tens to hundreds of millions of years. If we trigger such an event, our own survival is by no means guaranteed.
>>540741567WHITE MAKES RIGHTSee "The Geopolitical and Legal History of White Warfare Against Enslavement" https://write.as/mwq381bw4r7ms.mdFree Palestine" means "ReOpen the AntiRacist Islamic Slave Markets in Palestine"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_PalestineA blonde yazidi woman enslaved in Gaza was freed by Israel in 2024.https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpw5v077nyjoFawzia Amin Sido, a 21-year-old Yazidi woman enslaved by ISIS at age 11 and later trafficked to Gaza, was rescued in October 2024 through a coordinated secret operation involving the United States, Israel, Jordan, and Iraq.>>540741895
>>540744880Correct. White Values superceded Christian Values at the 1683 Siege of Vienna.See "The Geopolitical and Legal History of White Warfare Against Enslavement" https://write.as/mwq381bw4r7ms.md"Free Palestine" means "ReOpen the AntiRacist Islamic Slave Markets in Palestine"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_PalestineA blonde yazidi woman enslaved in Gaza was freed by Israel in 2024.https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpw5v077nyjoFawzia Amin Sido, a 21-year-old Yazidi woman enslaved by ISIS at age 11 and later trafficked to Gaza, was rescued in October 2024 through a coordinated secret operation involving the United States, Israel, Jordan, and Iraq.
Good thread. Will re-read it tomorrow.I tend to think I believe in MMR, but maybe I just came to the point, by observing people and the general state of society, that the only thing people will really understand is might. Violence is usually very clear, but sometimes you have to manipulate the stubborn ones, which is might in its own sense So, in a grander scale, what really is the point of this discussion? I appreciate it. I get a great sense of purpose from reading or getting to know interesting things in a dilettantistic way. But specially to the MMR guys, I don't really see much of a point.Thanks for entertaining me, I guess?
>>540748035>That's how hjmans wiped out saber toothed tigersHumans didn't cause the pleistocene extinction. All lions are man eaters. Even rats will devour a human if given the chance. If the last dodo bird was eaten by a starving British sailor, I don't blame him personally, but it's still unfortunate that a unique species is extinct, just to fill the belly of an OG zogbot who already consented to die. I'd rather dodos still exist than the casualties of expendable british increasing by less than a rounding error.
>>540749345You don't know if humans caused it or not. Truth is, most large predators will avoid humans like the plague, due to previous humans having wiped out the bravest of their kind. So only those who avoided humans survived and got to spread their cowardly genes. The only exception is the polar bear. Orcas are also not fearful, but they are too intelligent to put themselves at risk.
>>540741567"Might makes right" is a description of natural morality. "Ought" doesn't really exist, so (morally) right and wrong, good and bad are simply meaningless statements that do not correspond to any factual state of affairs about the world, see Wittgenstein. "Might makes right" is ultimately a correct description of natural morality because regardless of how "morally righteous" your society considers themselves, if they have morally inferior but stronger neighbors they will eventually be invaded and their morality will cease to exist. Thus, whatever any society happens to consider morally right over longer periods of time, necessarily must also increase society might, otherwise will cease to exist.
>>540748207Mao was correct, but that axiom doesn't say anything about the morality of the action.Mao also said:>All men must die, but death can vary in its significance. The ancient Chinese writer Ssu-ma Chien said, ‘Though death befalls all men alike, it may be weightier than Mount Tai or lighter than a feather.’ To die for the people is weightier than Mount Tai, but to work for the fascists and die for the exploiters and oppressors is lighter than a feather.RIP Zhu Rongji
>>540749504>You don't know if humans caused it or not.It's contentious.It's controversial, and official narratives don't surrender to new evidence without a fight. But if it's something you're genuinely interested in, consider this geology paper>A carbon-rich black layer, dating to ≈12.9 ka, has been previously identified at ≈50 Clovis-age sites across North America and appears contemporaneous with the abrupt onset of Younger Dryas (YD) cooling. The in situ bones of extinct Pleistocene megafauna, along with Clovis tool assemblages, occur below this black layer but not within or above it. Causes for the extinctions, YD cooling, and termination of Clovis culture have long been controversial. In this paper, we provide evidence for an extraterrestrial (ET) impact event at ≅12.9 ka, which we hypothesize caused abrupt environmental changes that contributed to YD cooling, major ecological reorganization, broad-scale extinctions, and rapid human behavioral shifts at the end of the Clovis Period. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0706977104
>>540741567Absurd, no. If you can take your opponents head off with artillery or an infantry rifle, then his arguments are of no mind.Nerd.
>>540748611>What awful thing am I shilling?You're being a subversive chaos agent by challenging the morality of imperialism. How much is Putin paying you?
>>540750112Interesting theory. The point still remains that large mammal predators avoid humans if they can help it and the reason is genetic. I wouldn't try my luck with hippos or cape buffaloes though.
>>540750202It was never the arguments of the defenseless people who were slaughtered by industrial weapons that swayed anyone. It was the inherent nature and moral depravity of the act that, that when realized and reflected upon long after the fact that swayed people.Theme song for this thread: Irish fighting music calling out cowardly anglos who aren't so tough when they're not gunning down tribesmen armed with bows with cannons.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6J7k0mEKMA
>>540741567It’s a sardonic expression, anon. It’s not making an absolute moral claim, it’s an admission of fact with a bitter taste.They are “right” for no other reason than “what the fuck are you gonna do about it?” That’s the point.But go ahead, be smug as the boot crashes down on your neck knowing that you are actually right, and they are wrong.
>>540744166And how is that 'morality' enforced?
>>540742792cows don't suffer, they live, eat and fuck until they get executed painlessly. why would they want to take revenge on us? obviously they don't even realize they're gonna die, sooner or later it doesn't matter
>>540744631>There is natural law to moralityMorality is the name we gave to our social animal instincts and they can pointed in any direction by society. Sacrificing 100 children is morally right if you think it will save the island from the wrath of the gods.
>>540741567>This is an absurd anti-philosophyIt's literally the ONLY moral system you can prove and observe. All others rely on gay external mental gymnastics. It is, literally, self-evident.Everything else is navelgazing.
>>540741567it's realityyou can be comfortable because you live in the greatest, mightest country in the worldif you were a shitholer you'd have to suck the dick of some other countrybecause you would be weak and the other country would be strong, and they could crush you both economically and physicallyit has always been this way, the weak tribe always had to suck off the strong tribe or getting crushed and conquered in a rebellionthe prey gets eaten by the hunter
>>540750628The same way all morality is enforced. What's your point?
>>540750800to add to thisif I shot you and destroy any trace of you and your belief, I win the argumentyou can't do the same to me because, by applying my belief yourself, I'm still winning the argumentit's basically an undisprovable truth
>>540750903So might makes right.
>>540750494>Interesting theoryIt really is. Anthropology is very political and open to interpretation, geologic evidence is more concrete (though look how much resistance there was from the old guard before the overwhelming evidence for plate tectonics was finally accepted).The fact that remains of mega fauna and the early Clovis humans that were hunting them abruptly terminate at this distinct stratigraphic layer suggests humans didn't hunt them to extinction, but they were abruptly wiped out by a sudden widespread event that also wiped out the people hunting them.Geology unfortunately is also political, as the implications of this are tangental to climate change issues.
>>540741567Right makes might. The more you conform to reality, the more you succeed. You may think I'm wrong. You may think that doing the 'right' thing is difficult. But the right thing isn't what makes you feel fuzzy warm sensations in your stomach, and it's not some kind of abstract human-designed morality.Reality is what remains when you stop believing in it, and if there's any kind of morality, it must be real first and ideal second. The more you conform to reality, the more you succeed.
>>540750494>The point still remains that large mammal predators avoid humans if they can help it and the reason is genetic.But the pressure of human predation didn't create a new genetic mutation. Anxiety and skittishness towards the unfamiliar is normal animal behavior. The suicidally cocksure ones got killed, but the survivors aren't a new adaptation, they have the OG cation genes.MMR is often fatal in the animal kingdom. Combat outside of performative rituals (eg the posturing and faux combat of mating and territorial rituals) is often only a pyrrhic victory, even a minor injury for the winner can be lethal.
>>540751696Early humans did not just kill the man-eating animal, but its offspring too and any that looked like it in the area. Any predarors that did not die gave humans a wide berth, except for some silly wolves that became doggos
>>540750800>you can be comfortable because you live in the greatest, mightest country in the worldSays the memeflaggot.You need to lurkmore, cause the west has gone to shit. Everyone was happy to go along with MMR and turn a blind eye to the dirty deeds of empire as long as a few shekels of the plunder trickled down to them, but the plunderers couldn't keep up that end of the bargain, and running out of 3rd worlders to plunder, they turned to their white cattle to make up the balance. That's the pain the west is feeling now, which MMR faggots are defending.
>>540751886Animals naturally expect everyone who isn't the mother might kill the cubs. That's just the default setting. Humans might have distilled the natural paranoia state by exterminating the portion of the population weak in that instinct, but it did not create it.>except for some silly wolves that became doggosIsn't that serendipitous. A rare instance where the brave mutations didn't get punished by human contact.Ever read Jack London? You'd love his novel White Fang (if you prefer audiobooks, there's one narrated by Frank Muller, he's excellent). The opening chapter is s-tier and will hook you immediately. A dogsled team traversing the far north, pursued by a pack of starving wolves. London's portrayal of both the man and animals perspective is so good. The pursuit of the wolves, driven by starvation and reduced to emaciated skeletons. Their natural fear battling their hunger as they test their boundries, encroaching on the perimeter of light from the fire, and learning that the increasingly exhausted responses of the men are feckless.It's such good literature. You'll love it.
>>540752282>jack londonlike the men first realizing the wolves that they saw pursuing in the day was fucking with them in camp when they fed the sled huskies, but one dog remained unfed, cause a wolf slipped into the group and ate one of the dogs dinners. And their gradual encroachment towards the camp fire, going from eyes reflected in the dark, to proto-domesticated dogs, inching their way closer to the fire and the men night after night.
MMR bap faggots must be going extinct, the remaining few are too busy seething about unobtainable pussy and pickle jars to show up and debate their ideology.
