Just Say No
(twitter.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (34)
sorted by:
Not sure I agree with this - I oppose all that shit for reasons I’ve convinced myself are actually for the good of everyone involved -
“gender affirming” leads to 41% suicide rate? I’m opposed for their own good (not to mention the poisonous effect that normalizing their delusions has on everyone else)
“Diversity” leads to zero trust environments built on endless resentment and race rioting? I’m opposed to that for everyone’s good, not just my property values or whatever
Same for fags, same for the ZOG, same for the clotshot, same for all this shit. Interested in other’s opinions on this.
No, you're right.
If anyone actually cares about the future of a functioning society, solipsism has to be put on a the back-burner.
There is a reason why the most successful nations in history had stringent rules on conduct and policy; family and economics. If you don't have these rules in place the entire system breaks down and fails (as we've seen time and time over again where the rules are ignored/broken and by proxy the entire infrastructure eventually collapses).
If people are making decisions, enabling policies and opening the door for decay, then it will eventually spread and it will eventually rot the moral and social columns of the social infrastructure, and inevitably cause a collapse.
It's not a matter of saying "No", just to be "evil" and selfish, but saying "No" for the sustained betterment of mankind.
No, you’re right! Great points all around.
The neoliberal/neoconservative death spiral of the last hundred years is like the Tragedy of the Commons on steroids, or maybe on estrogen-mimicking phytohormones
We must give up some amount of our individual desires and wants for the good of the whole then?
That's kind of how it's always been for some societies to be successful. There's always a give and take, both on the micro-level with inter-personal relationships (i.e., how to have a sustainable marriage) and on the macro-level with extra-personal relationships (i.e., workforce, municipality, republic/democratic/monarchical engagement).
There is always going to be some level of individualism you need to keep to maintain self-worth and self-determined valuation, while also having to give some of it up for the collective good. It's a fine balancing act, as one of too much or the other leads to collapse, which is typically why most successful nations have found that balance through some form of theocracy.
I’m not religious but am frightened by what people that lack it seem to believe. I greatly dislike the idea that my morals should come from a higher being but without it people start cutting up kids and telling them they’re the opposite sex while simultaneously saying that the opposite sex doesn’t have anything to do with what body parts you have.
It’s insane! I’d rather live among real Christians than atheist.
I'm with you. The 4000 year old book of "stupid superstitions" is a surprisingly good guide to civilization level morals. These things are for everyone's good.
It turns out that we aren't the first civilization to discover degeneracy. Or the first one to discover socialism. Or the first one to discover importing foreigners. Every other group that did that collapsed and went extinct, and we're next.
And the reason those "outdated morals" are still around is because only the people with those morals survived, and the deviants destroyed themselves. It's not obvious why these rules work, but they do, and it's in everyone's interest for us all to follow them.
Very much true too. Coddling is often not the answer. Not even just with trannies and faggotry. Sometimes people need to be left to figure out their own problems or fail. It really is for their own good. Otherwise they tend to be doomed to repeat them.
Except this is where "equality feels like oppression" comes in as a core truth. You've now recast yourself as the leftist side of the argument to seek "the greater good" for some abstract ultimately religions beliefs.
"Gender affirming" care IS better for the selfishly motivated people who push hardest for it, and in a zero sum game any gain by anybody other than them is a loss, a loss is opposition, opposition begats conflict and conflict justifies force.
You advocating for "more winners" is advocating for their loss. That's all that matters. You are trying to take away from one group to give to another in the name of fairness, and that designates you as an Adversary.
This is clown world of course, so you are harming demonic anti-human pedophiles to benefit innocent children, but the structure of the conflict remains the same.
Just as if my whole community was made up of rapists, the moral imperative would not be "the greatest good" and sacrificing my family, it would be painting the streets with their entrails. Very selfishly.
If I could sum up. If the only difference between you and your enemy is who ACTUALLY deserves the treatment under discussion, the treatment isn't actually inhumane. Which fine, but it places you in the same moral category as them. It's not enough.
It's the same way that you can't distinguish Hitler quotes from BLM ones, the framework is identical, leftist are literally one binary switch away from agreeing with the Holocaust, and that switch is "the jews didn't ACTUALLY do that, but white people DO"
Tl;Dr no bad tactics only bad targets doesn't work as a moral framework
The true pirate/fuck-you-i-got-mine mentality is pretending to hold some ludicrous moral position for personal social gains. Because pretending to be the good guy is a very easy get out of jail free card in a highly passive, risk averse societies like most modern Western countries. It's common human nature to side with whichever guy is perceived as being more "good" in an otherwise unsubstantiated conflict. Denying that the majority of people, normies especially, have pro-social instincts is almost as foolish as denying biological sexes exist. There is power in PR, a mediocre man with 100 idiots behind him can be more of a threat than any individual in many theaters.
Saying abandon morality is saying you should just join whichever guys have the current social advantage. Thinking personal interest will automatically drive people to oppose the prevailing crazy ideas of IDPol and biological denialism just means you're not approaching personal interest as smart as the rats selling out their fellow man for good boy points and kickbacks from the cult hivemind.