Post reply

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: March 03, 2026, 07:16:44 am »

Quote
Even in democratic societies, the right to die is denied.

Why say "even"? I do not think it is coincidental that many democracy-compatible philosophers opposed suicide:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_suicide

Quote
Common philosophical opinion of suicide since modernization reflected a spread in cultural beliefs of western societies that suicide is immoral and unethical.[2]
...
For Camus, suicide was the rejection of freedom. He thought that fleeing from the absurdity of reality into illusions, religion, or death is not the way out. Instead of fleeing the absurd meaninglessness of life, we should embrace life passionately.
...
G. K. Chesterton calls suicide "the ultimate and absolute evil, the refusal to take an interest in existence". He argues that a person who kills themself, as far as he is concerned, destroys the entire world (apparently exactly repeating Maimonides' view).
...
John Stuart Mill argued, in his influential essay "On Liberty," that since the sine qua non of liberty is the power of the individual to make choices, any choice that one might make that would deprive one of the ability to make further choices should be prevented.
...
Kant argues that, since objective morality is grounded in one's own ability to reason, suicide is wrong because it involves removing that ability through ending one's life, thereby creating a kind of practical contradiction.
...
Hobbes and Locke reject the right of individuals to take their own life. Hobbes claims in his Leviathan that natural law forbids every man "to do, that which is destructive of his life, or take away the means of preserving the same."
...
Aristotle in his 'discussion of courage, maintains that committing suicide to avoid pain or other undesirable circumstances is a cowardly act. In a later chapter [of Nicomachean Ethics], he further argues that suicide is unlawful and is an act committed against the interests of the state.'[6]
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: November 05, 2025, 05:27:28 pm »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SD_0KwRqyNc

I agree that leftism needs a narrative with villains in order to succeed. I disagree that the correct villains are billionaires. The correct villain is Western civilization. For example, billionaires who plan to buy immortality machines are undoubtedly vampires, but it is Western civilization (which promises to make these machines possible in the first place) which enables vampirism. Defeat Western civilization and vampirism is defeated automatically. Defeat merely the current vampires but let Western civilization remain and there will be other aspiring vampires in the future.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: October 27, 2025, 06:09:40 pm »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGzzsg8tooM

We need leftists demanding the physical extermination of every Trump voter. If it is good for Kirk to die, it is good for every Trump voter to die. So simply bring your view to its logical conclusion!
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: June 12, 2025, 02:53:42 pm »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJOq2ub6YPw

I have said from the beginning that the name "DEI" was a poor choice, as both "D" and "I" imply "whites" retaining partial power. Only "E" even has a chance of being interpreted as removing all power from "whites", which is what needs to be done openly, proudly and above all urgently.

Also, as I have also always said, no opposition to "white" supremacism should be organized around "blackness" (which superficially sounds identitarian whether or not it actually is). Everything should be organized around "non-whiteness", thereby pinpointing from the outset that folkism is the underlying value.

Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: March 17, 2025, 06:14:49 pm »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s77SvH1P0Xg

Not bad, but the problem is not just "the billionaires". The problem is Western civilization. (Hint: how many of the Western colonialists 500 years ago were billionaires?)
Posted by: rp
« on: December 01, 2024, 10:59:44 pm »

"A particular bad sign I am noticing at present is an emerging camp recommending dissocation of the leftist brand from social issues. If followed, this will definitely not lead to True Leftism."
This was recommended in 2016 as well, that leftists should distance themselves from "SJWs".

Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: December 01, 2024, 10:31:32 pm »

The sample size is too small for now to draw any conclusions. The shift is also still on a superficial level so far, mainly focused on how to win and merely considering True Leftism as one untried path (among others) to winning. It is still totally possible for them to choose another wrong path instead. A particular bad sign I am noticing at present is an emerging camp recommending dissocation of the leftist brand from social issues. If followed, this will definitely not lead to True Leftism.

Posted by: rp
« on: December 01, 2024, 09:42:35 pm »

I know we have touched on this point before, but could False Leftists feeling the need for True Leftism be a product of a marginally greater amount of Aryan blood than other False Leftists?
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: December 01, 2024, 07:26:34 pm »

Posted by: rp
« on: November 19, 2024, 08:58:20 pm »

I have seen False Leftists feeling the need for True Leftism since 2016, where they were criticizing Obama for his drone policies, and Clinton for her hawkish stance toward Iran. Many of them also rejected the wave of Islamophobia, and also increasingly criticized Israel (which is why Dave Rubin (Jew) left TYT). It seems like the potential is there, just that they don't have enough to become True Leftists.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: November 15, 2024, 06:26:51 pm »

Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: November 11, 2024, 05:16:36 pm »

Fiorentini almost gets it at 4:44 but loses it again at 4:59:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4czSKIJf50
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: November 08, 2024, 05:14:35 pm »