/r9k/ - ROBOT9999

Economically left Socially right. Authoritarian.

Authoritarian is the simplest part to explain. Nothing gets done by letting people do shit alone, and for any rules or morals to be upheld you need someone enforcing rules. Any greatness in history came from a centralised position of power. Caesar, Napoleon, Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, literally any monarch with the title of "the great".

I'm socially right wing because why the hell would I be on this site if I was a leftist. I hate that trannies exist and want them all hanged (Does this make me an accelerationist). Fags have kinda existed since antiquity but it was better when they would be shot for being public about it. I want the turd-worlders gone because they brap everything up.

Economically left wing. I want state control over industries, kinda like the chinks have, and for the government to be protectionist. Why the hell would a state prioritise free markets over the good of their own people. Free markets were literally forcibly imposed to control countries like Qing China and the Ottoman Empire while Europe could protect their own economies. Partial state ownership of all major industries while smaller businesses are allowed to do what they want with minimal taxation. Partial state ownership incentivises efficiency since the owners of the companies still benefit from profits, and provide the state with a lot of money without having to tax individuals to death.

With all the money the state has it could fund major projects, and invest into the country. You could have the state setting contracts and getting companies to fight for them like most military industrial complexes work, the best wins. Public infrastructure and welfare could be made manageable. To combat welfare leeches you have strict checks for who gets it and who doesn't, and any leeches can be conscripted labour for construction.

>>97146
I dont follow any ideology personally, I am for military meritocracy (e.g Rome during some eras like Trajan, or Italo Balbo Libya, DPRK, Kodoha faction Military coup attempt )

Also I am for for decentralizaing everything

i dont care about politico slop. just put me in charge of everything with absolute unimpeachable powers and i would never never never never never never ever become a hedonistic and deranged despot X3

>>97146
this guy is a retard that thinks monarchy and despotism is le good beacuse of 5 or 6 """based""" and """redpilled""" heads of state he heard about on /pol/ and saw edits of on niggergram reels while ignoring that the glaring problems that make democracies retarded also infect any sort of absolute power structure even worse, that being 90% of people are amoral retards without the force of will to take power and wield it intelligently, 9% are amoral geniuses that won't wield power with the interests of the state much less the people in mind and the remaining 1% is so rare that those that DO actually want power and don't realize leading a country is a lot of heartache and hassle just get killed by the 9% wielding the 90% as a weapon (i.e. caesar). those few that do get the """"""privilege"""""" of leading their state are really good >though

btw hitler wasn't great he was a retard that blew his load too early and lost all of his territory and paved the way for german heritage and identity to be completely erased as it is now in the 21st century. also ww2 caused a retaliatory german holocaust that just got more germans killed needlessly after the fact as if the rape of berlin by ruzzians wasn't enough. if he really was great he would've expanded infinitely slower instead of trying to conquer all of europe before he had answered the jewish question like an idiot

>>97192
Hitler was a nigger

>>97193
trvke. hitler was a shabbos goy and im tired of pretending he wasn't

>>97197
This is the most masculine hitler hater

Misanthropy and hatred of all life in general. I despise conventional slave morality and I long for societal collapse.

>>97202
I don't let my misanthropy bleed into my worldview. My personal issues with people don't reflect on the nature of people overall. I think that even if I despise the people around me, I should still resolve to act on the greater good.
I think a total societal collapse is not the way to go about it. Just like the bolsheviks, Jews could swoop up a collapsing society from under and take control of it with an even firmer fist than they had before. If there is to be a revolution it will need to know its enemy and strike its throat.

>>97146 mi

>>97192
Hitler was a retard definitely but he was still a "great" person. He still took over basically all of europe.

I want a more authoritarian stance on government but not a monarchy, I'm not that retarded. The first king might be great and then the second is a complete brainlet that is only there because of his blood. You can have an authoritarian figure with a whole lot of strength placed more in the bureaucratic system and plenty of checks for power. My main reason for wanting an authoritarian system instead of a democracy is from what I've observed with the democratic system.

Promising realistic changes gets you nowhere. You have to lie out of your arse, because you having power depends entirely on convincing the most retarded niggers out there that you are better than the other candidate, when those retarded niggers won't even read your proposed policy and depend entirely on information from the press and social media.

Then once someone is elected, they have an incredibly short term time. No matter what, you can blame all problems, including those you cause, on the previous opposing party in charge, and the goyim just nod and agree. There is no point in making long term investments, because if they are longer than 4 years or however long the term time is, if the opposing party gets voted in they will rape it and make their own similar project to take the credit. Also, people only care about what has happened recently for elections, not what could happen in 10 or 20 years time that was set up.

Some of these problems could be sorted out by having longer term times, maybe 10 years. Forces the ruling party to take some responsibility and allows for more long term projects.

I don't watch based and redpilled nigger edits, and I definitely don't base my ideology on that. I have been trying to tell people that hitler was a retard for ww2 and demolished the old order of the west by bringing down the old colonial powers, letting the only two powers be the communists and the jewish states of america. The Suez Crisis, the colonial wars in Indochina, Algeria and Rhodesia, these are all cases that would have not been possible if France and Britain were not weakened.

If Hitler wasn't a retarded nigger he wouldn't have been itching for a war and would have stopped when the Poles refused to let him have Danzig. Germany would have been the most powerful country in Europe, and if they hadn't signed the pact they could have prevented Soviet expansion. The jews weren't popular in a single place in Europe at the time, even the most liberal countries like France still had strong antisemitic presence and only really the USA liked them. They would have been given their shithole in Palestine and nobody would have listened to them whining all day about "its anotha shoah!", they would be ignored in the west and too busy fighting sandniggers.

>>97201
Define masculinuty

>>97216
sure, he raped a lot of europe but at what cost to his state? his people? the reason friederich is remembered as 'the great' to this day is because he was able expand and enhance prussia WITHOUT GETTING IT RAPED LITERALLY TO DEATH AND SET UP HIS PEOPLE FOR AN ENTIRE CENTURY OF HUMILIATION. how could hitler possibly be great if he didnt accomplish anything but ending anti-semitism in the west, the complete OPPOSITE of one of his stated goals?

and what is the point of an authoritarian leader if most his power is placed in the government? and who chooses the next leader after the first one bites it? the government itself? a small cabal of oligarchs? and who picks the seats in that government anyhow, it that democratic or is the autocrat allowed to stack the deck, completely neutering any chance the checks and balances had of stopping tyranny? surely with an supreme leader you get real change, but how much of that change is good? how long before dear leader goes mad from power and the entire country is set back decades because we all agreed that this one retard gets power for the rest of his life no matter what? does he get couped by nobles and replaced with someone that cares more about the epstein class than the working class? at least with a democratic system the leader as some reason to be vaguely familiar with the wants and needs of his people, but with an authoritarian he's gonna be spending so long up in his ivory tower he will likely just forget what the people want or stop fucking caring.

also, the government is not the people. having a ruler be beholden to government wants is absolutely not the same as a ruler being beholden to his people. just take one look throughout history and see how often a good ruler has to fight tooth and nail just to get around the bureaucratic clusterfuck of his government just to make real change happen. one man with a grudge or an complex in the wrong place can completely FUCK everything up. the elimination of democracy does not stop parties from spawning either. just give it some time, and before long there are going to be factions vying for power and fucking over people they dont like wasting valuable government time and tax money under the nose of the big man in charge, official or unofficial it doesnt matter. it is human nature to form tribes, and thats what humans are going to do.

all this doesnt even approach the subject of the rarity of finding a compitent and moral leader. i suppose a state could get by by having a long string of 'meh' rulers that dont do anything too bad while having a gigachad in office every so often, but all it takes is one corrupt sociopath to flush most of that progress down the toilet, or in the case of hitler, RAPE the country and its people TO DEATH because of unchecked ambition. and who among is is most likely to seek power? i sure as hell know it isn't the people that deserve it and are able to withstand it's corrupting influence.

and napoleon, remember him? the same autist that crowned him self emperor just to start a war with all of europe because he couldn't keep his dick in his pants, killing millions of frenchmen for an ambition that DIED before he did? what a great guy that napoleon, took power from a corrupt government, crowned himself emperor, and got BTFO'D after a few years of making europe his bitch. just for the old monarchy to get reinstated with less power. what did he do for france, other than making it a military superpower for a short time in history and making the rest of europe leak their clitty? fucking NOTHING. the best part about his reign was that it ended and louis xviii was reinstated and the people of france finally got a break from being milked dry by the ambition of crazed retards.

>>97289
me
>gigariginal

>>97292
Hitler le bad

>>97143 (OP)
idk like clitty-adjacent neo-whitepowerism or however the ideologies are brapped

>>97312
Coal check…

>>97143 (OP)
God you r9khomos are all just so worthless

national-fascism

>>97289
not being a feminine homosexual like you

>>97324
Saging to give yourself an attention

>>97326
Who said I cant be feminine outside and masculine inside?

>>97325
What that even mean

>>97330
Generic military dictatorslop ideology #90001

>>97331
Fascism is when evil racist capitalism

>>97332
who are you responding to? me or the strawman?

>>97334
Is this ragebait?

>>97337
what do you think? who said anything about racism or capitalism? you need to get off of /pol/ little buddy. come join the rest of us in the real world, ok?

>>97339
Its a joke, stop being inmature

>>97348
sorry im used to talking to people mindbroken by politics i thought you were being serious. take this rare soy as recompense

>>97349
I dont care what you tal anyway, no need your apologies or words

>>97350
I think I know you from the 'tube

>>97447
Huh?? What you mean

Niggrr threar

>>99587
gigatrvkerald of the milky way galaxy

Transhumanism could literally solve the vast majority of issues but it would be actual, full fledged fascism. Zero freedom. Zero autonomy. Zero individuality. Combine Thomas Hobbes conception of the Leviathan with Ray Kurzweils singularity; the digital leviathan. A perfectly functioning, flourishing, heaven on earth hyper advanced citadel. AI government displace all of the endless retards in power, no one will win. People will be assimilated, augmented, evolved.

stop bumping like selfish little fuck

>>99627
this take is so bad it might be bait. heaven on earth in this case is a fucking ant hill. no individuality, turn people into cogs in a machine in the most literal sense. niggers like you need to get hanged

>>99638
Yes. Civilisation is a machine, and it should be fully realised.

>>99647
men are not made for machines. civilization is not the end goal of life, it has become an abomination that has superseded the natural order and like a bonzai that has grown out of shape it will be pruned and redirected by the same forces it wished to submit. the full realization of civilization spells the death of humanity

>>99629
>>99627
People need to be 'aped keep living in your fantasies nigger

Voting reform, afd,SD, gop is my big idea

>>99670
Ew nigger

kill everyone i dont like

>>99670
branigger reform will ruin the UK keep getting brainwashed by the rich goyim

nigger tranny kike faggot chink mudslime goatfucker jeet curry muncher street shitter favela rat shitskin

i believe in arson, murder and rape in that specific order

69 nice wowwwwwwwwie

>>99768
Nigger what buuuh

I used to be NatSoc but I think I let the hate just consume my entire life, was always angry was always stressed. Always just felt under attack, probably because I was more on the accelerationist side, maybe I did it wrong or maybe its just not for me. But I've just been chilling for now, probably going to go towards the more environmental side of politics so the people who come after us will at least be able to live the hunter gatherer aryan trad lifestyle.

Pro-beatles

>>97143 (OP)
Absolute monarchism, hetmanism to be exact

>>99808
You gay huh

>>99902
>You gay huh
No nigger, I'm not.

I like Vincent Snyder's ideas, total absolute destruction of anything that doesn't belong in the world, and the birth of a spiritual and enlightened society of pure aryan beings.

>>100121
who decides what does and doesnt belong in the world

>>97143 (OP)
(1 of 2)
Economy:
Free market capitalism with no restrictions on industry (the only restrictions would be those that infringe on peoples God-given rights)
for example: you cannot sell poison that will kill someone in 1 hr and call it a energy drink as that is infringing on a person's property right of self.
Abolish taxes, every man is entitled to their own work, lazy people starve to death. Innovators win.
i would not consider myself a "Ancap" as im not exactly sure on all of the things they believe.

Art:
the definition of art is a creation medium (like painting music video games) that inspires people or otherwise that is aesthetically pleasing and is not a disturbing creation that promotes or glorifies things that would result in social decay (I.E. Porn ""art"", Modern Art) art that is high effort, and doesn't look like it was created by some infantile pinko degenerate.
i believe some art is objectively better then other art. based on the time effort and actual execution of the art.
I think AI image generation is a very good thing: it will kill all of the artists who make meaningless crap, if you are a Artist i don't believe you should worry about AI so long as ur actually making meaningful and inspiring works

Things i View as bad:
things that cause social decay i view as bad:
Hedonism, transgenderism, sodomy, socialism (at least the western version were people live on welfare) taxes (politicians funding shit they shouldn't be), generally sort term pleasuring seeking activities. murder (kill all tccpedos). Degenerate things that have become "lifestyles" ("femboy" "furry"). I'm not a failtroll so i dont exactly hate one boogie man, all these groups are degenerative only serve to cause more problems and are puppetered by the CIA. generally i view governments as bad, so you could say "power-seeking" people

>>100155
(2 of 2)
Social:
I think that generally there should be freedom of self expression, but degenerate groups should not been seen as an expression of the self, some good examples of groups of people who try to hide behind the label of "self expression" despite really just joining another community to conform too are: The Hippies, Femboys, Furries, Trannies, certain groups of Normies, Commies, "Alt" girls, some "neo-nazi" groups, "digital Artists".
We very well should allow for self expression, to suppress it is to loose on many opportunities, but people don't realize some groups aren't actually about "self-expression" some of these groups are really about embracing hedonism and they're "right" to embrace their worse traits. Self expression is fine, but it is important that as a society we must instill values like "integrity" and logic skills so when children eventually grow up they can reach the logical conclusions as to why to society was design in the way it is, and why someone can't just do everything they "desire", i tend to see people flock to different ideologies often because they do not understand the values and the logic taken to put said ideologies together, usually some people get wrapped up into the emotions of something and they get mind Br0ken by some logical fallacy they cannot work out in their own head
Generally speaking values and principals are very important, when a society has them the likelihood for social decay goes down dramatically.
every man should actively be striving to be masculine, to be feminine is not only against your nature and biology but will end up causing you more suffering then that of "actually being yourself", because in all reality you are not being yourself and the biological part of yourself notices that you are conflicting in many areas. Men of any society should be seeking to create inspiring things, invent things that will improve the world/or their people, and destroy people/things that are actively harming the world and or their people. no man should be overtly emotional or lazy, or engaging in meaningless crap.
Sex roles are very important, erasing the lines between men and women has caused societies in the past to fall, and even in the modern day it has caused massive social decay. there are other reasons as to why people needing to know the difference between men and women is important but you can already probably think out some more reasons why
people should have the right to absolute privacy, if society was more armed the likelihood and death rate from mass shootings would go down significantly, thus a need for the glowies to view your chatlogs being un-needed
side rant: but young people should learn how to be bored, most people have stunted mental growth and otherwise depth in general due to being overstimulated from many things, since the brain is always stimulated the brain never thinks to deeply thus when you are bored you think the deepest.

NOTE: I am not a globoHomo im just using the term "the world" sort of as a substitute for the greater good, THERE SHOULD BE COUNTRIES AND BORDERS, SOME PEOPLE SIMPLY DON'T GET ALONG WITH ONE ANOTHER

things I view as good:
Anything that improves the world, demonizes social decay, and the destruction of people/places/things that are actively harming the world. improves people.
I think that Killing is a thing that is okay, because it can be used to remove undesirables, or elites who are tyrannical.

Type of government:
I like the ideas of a constitutional republic, with maybe a more stringent policy on social matters. Not exactly like the US Const. I think that ideas of fascism or right wing tyrannical-ism is more of a pipe dream, and is more likely to cause problems and a lower QOL for citizens, as only one bad person has to get in for the whole countries greatness to topple. I am EXTREMELY against communism and democracy.

dalit feminism

>>100144
Read Siege my dude

>>100163
Notice the lack of anything actually about the book itself or it's philosophy

>>100167
>Notice the lack of anything actually about the book itself or it's philosophy

It's too ESL pilled

>>100185
Why we fedposting

>>100160
you mean the neo-nazi? i cant find anything on the guy other than news articles claiming he got swatted and that vincent snyder is an alias. i am open to reading his book although i can hardly imagine anything inside will be of value; the man is likely a fed, even if he isnt i dont think i would agree with the writings of a political extremist such as he, as i am, in fact, not white.
>>100155
a few questions.
1. without taxes, how will the government make money?
2. could you give me a list of god-given rights and where and when they were bestowed upon man by him
3. who decides what is and isnt aesthetically pleasing? what defines high effort? would you say that, for example, the pic related is art or degenerate art? (pic related is three graces, by peter paul rubens)
4. ai image generation is only capable of making meaningless crap now (which is debatable, im sure there have been many a boomer moved to tears by some pajeetslop on facebook), but what if it becomes far more sophisticated? in the event the difference between a picture genned ai slop and one penned by a human hand is impossible to divine (this goes for music, games, movies, whateva), what would you do then?
5. again, who decides what is and isnt a valid form of self expression? is it the government, general public opinion, or (You)?
6. what do you define as masculinity? what of femininity?
6b. if you could, would you erase all tomboys and femboys and retvrn them to their traditional forms of gender expression?
7. how can you decide what is the nature of a man other than yourself?
8. what of gender roles? do you conflate the two?
9. what is absolute privacy? is there such a thing as a public space in your utopia, and would one be entitled to absolute privacy even then?
10. you speak a lot of improving humanity and the world, and i am curious as to what the end goal of all this improvement is? what is the ubermensch in your mind, and the ideal end-state of the world? is there no end state at all, and the intent is to improve humanity until the sun fizzles out?
11. what do you define as an improvement to humanity? is it an improvement to the individual's life experience, or is the experience of the entire race paramount?
12. wouldn't a constitutional republic just be populated by the same power seekers that you hate? and doesnt a republic put power in the hands of the people, achieving the same ends as a democracy albiet by different methods?

>>100288
i made a few errors in my typing. oh well. question #8 is inquiring about "sex roles", and the typo is question 10 is just be being a retard

>>100288
>>100289
i wont lie, im a SLF and i dont feel like responding to all dis, but nonetheless i do appreciate your questions and ill answer them, at some point. but what i can say for now is that i probably should've elaborated more, essentially in my stances my philisophy tries to be more objective about things but i haven't defined all the variables (defined in my head just now aloud) see you when i do

>>100288
>1. without taxes, how will the government make money?
there are many ways, some of them include selling gov't owned property, some light tarrifs, other countries investing in our's, hell im sure some kind of government run wall-street type thing could be run where the gov't hires people to trades stock for them (although i dont know if this may cause further problems haven't thought about new methods)
really though as it stands the government has wasted trillions of dollars, and has many useless bureaucratic organizations inside of it that really ought to be abolished (glowies), also private companies have better incentives to build things rather then the gov't building things (roads for example) governments could possibly try to compete in certain industries with private companies too
>2. could you give me a list of god-given rights
the right to speak freely, the right to protect ones own property, to create things, liberty, self-defense, privacy, make your own judgements, have your own thoughts, movement, right to education your child. now these are all things given to us by God but it doesnt mean that they shouldnt be regulated in some capacity, i have the free will to kill someone, or commit other heinous acts but it doesnt mean i should and it doesnt mean that we should live in a society that tolerates the such
>and where and when they were bestowed upon man by him
im not super religious, so im not exactly sure what you mean here. but to try and answer your question the best i can, God gives the rights to a person a birth.
>3. who decides what is and isnt aesthetically pleasing? what defines high effort? would you say that, for example, the pic related is art or degenerate art? (pic related is three graces, by peter paul rubens)
it is hard to define Aesthetically pleasing, at least with art i believe it is generally a objective thing but also has a degree of subjectivity to it. we all know that principals of design is something that exists, as well as colors that mix well together in situations and some that do not. High effort would be like something that you can generally tell took a lot of time to make, there was a large effort in order to create something. Now high effort does not always mean something is good, there also must be good execution to something aswell, this is usually something that people with good-judgement can do. For the art picrel, I think it is not degenerate and that it is high art because:
1. the image doesn't depict women engaging in sexually immoral acts
2. it is not designed/created with the intent of some lustful provocation, with porn "Art" generally speaking it is drawn in a way that is meant to arouse people generally, now i know you are going to argue or question that "isnt that still subjective" i wouldn't say so its not hard to discern when an image is attempting to cause arousal and when it is not. porn "artists" will generally try to make certain details more appealing, while in this art it depicts realistic naked women hanging about. while porn "art" is designed with the intent to be as appealing as possible in the pornographic kind of way
>4. ai image generation is only capable of making meaningless crap now (which is debatable, im sure there have been many a boomer moved to tears by some pajeetslop on facebook), but what if it becomes far more sophisticated? in the event the difference between a picture genned ai slop and one penned by a human hand is impossible to divine (this goes for music, games, movies, whateva), what would you do then?
for now it is in my opinion to early to see if AI will actually be able to create anything meaningful or good, and i say this because an AI is a machine, it does not have feelings, and it doesn't have the ability to suffer, it doesn't really understand philosophical tid bits of advice in a way that will meaningfully affect its own way of existing. for this reason alone unless ai becomes sentient and it does feel pain in its own way, I do not think we will be seeing anything to meaningful from AI for a long time. and as it stands now the whole "AI" thing is treated like how GMO's are in food. if you want to appeal to the masses or the art-types you have to slap a "NO-AI" on your work, and its free good boy points

>>100288
5. again, who decides what is and isnt a valid form of self expression? is it the government, general public opinion, or (You)?
i think definitively, things that are hedonistic in nature are not valid forms of self expression, for example trannies; they believe that being "trans" and wearing female or otherwise that subculture of fashion is a valid form of self expression. These people are not actually being themselves, it is self-evident and biologically proven (via the John Money experiments) that a boy is supposed to become a man and be masculine. (I will define "masculine" in number 6 don't worry) Really Transgenders are not accepting themselves for who they are because they were born as a man and that is an unchangeable characteristic, (well of course unless you change the language and subvert it!) they are rejecting how they are born and their nature. When you cross dress, it blurs the lines between men and women, and sends a message to society as a whole that this is a "normal" thing when it is indeed not. Another way to define something that isn't valid self expression is something that makes you embrace your worst characteristics, sure you are showing everyone that you have these things, but are people who embrace drug abuse in your society really the people who you want in your society? NO! just look at the Chinese opium wars, and where most hippies probably ended up. Is wearing a shirt with 'p on it valid self expression?
>6. what do you define as masculinity? what of femininity?
I think that masculinity is that of being a provider, a creator, a pathfinder(explorer), and that of being strong and strong willed in your goals, also generally being rational and logical, as well as being independent/sovereign
femininity is that of being submissive, and generally that of the emotional type, somewhat "compassionate" and more of a supporter role. men want a woman that is going to be a net benefit in their lives and not one that is high maintenance
>6b. if you could, would you erase all tomboys and femboys and retvrn them to their traditional forms of gender expression?
tomboys are "fine" in the fact that they are, a sort of subculture not born out of sexual degeneracy, but that of a women who is too self conscious, and who generally enjoys things that men typically enjoy, they are generally higher value because a woman of that type understands men a lot more and the things that they do so they have a higher appreciation, usually tomboys do embrace a semblance of a feminine side at some point in their lives. Tomboys even though they may have masculine traits, they really aren't as masculine as some may believe. they still act very much a women just with some interests that men have. so for that i'd leave em alone. actually Black women are more masculine then that of a "tomboy" because of the lack of a father figure in the family they have to pick up masculine traits in order to help with raising the family.
"Feminine boys" on the other hand is something born out of degeneracy and sodomy, and generally weakness. They should return to being manly as that is their only path, to choice femininity as a man is to not reach your true potential, it is to hinder yourself, it is to embrace a disturbed and degenerate lifestyle instead of growing up. (and this is fairly self-evident if you go onto "r/sillyboysclub" kek)
>7. how can you decide what is the nature of a man other than yourself?
the nature of man is to be masculine (of which i defined beforehand) this is not something i decided it is something baked into man, and sometimes that nature is hindered or changed in a way that is perverted due to the environment and weak-minded-ness

>>100288
>8. what of gender roles? do you conflate the two?
i dont really like to use the term gender because it was made by some paedophile
but essentially it is the roles men and women are put into, now there are part of sex-roles that are culturally constructed like how the men where suits and women where skirts, but that is partially for social convenience, but what is NOT a social construct is that a man must be a provider and masculine, and vice versa with women. for both to be swapped or erased or to obfuscate them is to blur the lines between men and women causing many societal issues (that we are facing today)
>9. what is absolute privacy? is there such a thing as a public space in your utopia, and would one be entitled to absolute privacy even then?
as in, the government should not spy on you, neither should companies, although with companies we technically give them to the right to spy on us by using their services, THOUGH i think it would be interesting to make certain information about a person non-collectible, or allow a person to have the right to not have certain information about them stored. There would be public spaces, and in public spaces you are allowed to be filmed ect. since they are public, but while in public spaces you shouldn't be subjected to spying on by the gov't or any entity rather because your in a public space.
>10. you speak a lot of improving humanity and the world, and i am curious as to what the end goal of all this improvement is? what is the ubermensch in your mind, and the ideal end-state of the world? is there no end state at all, and the intent is to improve humanity until the sun fizzles out?
im not exactly sure what the end-goal would be maybe just having a happy world and WORLD PEACE or something like that, a world where every man(and woman) is fulfilled and has purpose. but not some warped "brave new world" where hedonism is everywhere and you are pre-determined from birth what to do. also as for who i think the "ubermensch" are generally just virtuous people, or you could define it alternatively as people who truly think for themselves, provide for their family, invent/create beautiful art / technology. and people who destroy evil.
>11. what do you define as an improvement to humanity? is it an improvement to the individual's life experience, or is the experience of the entire race paramount?
i guess you could say both, an improved life for one and for all sounds great to me, not exactly sure what you mean here.
>12. wouldn't a constitutional republic just be populated by the same power seekers that you hate? and doesnt a republic put power in the hands of the people, achieving the same ends as a democracy albiet by different methods?
with democracy you have any jo shmo voting on laws voting on this and that, with a constitutional republic, voting would be more gatekept, and a well thought out way test for getting the ability to vote, a system would need to be in place to make sure you dont get falsely declined your ability to vote. voting should be more of a privileged to those who actually took the time to learn how politics the economy and how the world works. Voters will then have better judgement as to not vote in frauds. sort of like the US power should be divided (federalism is the term i think?)

op is this u? https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcGNg2IeQhG56K6xanHZngg

>>100548
No, I just watch litchi hikari doe

>>100288
Nigger shut up

>>100535
thank you for taking the time to respond to my questions. here is my response to your response.
1. the first three options seem feasible to me, though i am a layman. i have qualms however with any sort of government run companies or trading on the stock market. the u.s. government today is rife with insider trading, and encouraging the government to trade stocks as a major form of income will only increase the foul play tenfold. i feel the same way about government run companies, this would be like establishing a football league and assigning the referee to be a coach for some of the teams while making it so his salary comes primarily from betting on the games. it is impossible to have a fair market if the regulator has lots and lots of skin in the game, good business sense would be to regulate all competition out of the market.
<nigger space
as for private companies having greater incentive to build things i agree, but their incentives to make quality builds is dubious at best. as far as im aware we already auction off government contracts to private companies, and funnily enough the lowest bidder always seems to win. strange thing, aint it?
<aryan space
2. i was asking what source you pulled the list of rights from. it could be your bible, a pastor or theologian, whatever. i understand that these rights are bestowed upon man at birth, i am just wondering where it was in your religious texts these rights were bestowed onto man.
<nigger space
3. i understand what you mean, but i chose the art by rubens for a specific reason. he is notable among his peers for depicting women in his own "rubenesque" style, which is to say he loved bbws. he chose to depict women in this way (this is an assumption but i think it is a fair one to make) because that is what got his rocks off, compared to what was typical at the time (pic related is the rokeby venus by diego velasquez). the graces themselves are a personification of beauty and are supposed to be sexy, and while i agree that the piece and others wasn't made with a pornographic intent i would be a liar if i said it did not arouse me a little. art such as this (among others) while not created with explicitly pornographic intent may still be used as goonfuel, and art created as goonfuel in some cases may fly completely under the radar as arousing. compare the two classical pieces to this modern one (second picrel is a commission made for the wonderbread guy, a man that fetishizes consumerism, industry, and how it destroys the environment). if i hadn't told you, or shown the picture to someone uninitiated, they might assume it to be a panel out of a political comic or some piece made with comedic intent, although that is not so. i understand also that this is a fringe case, but it is worth considering seeing as there are many paraphilias out there, as well as there being many real women that are just plain sexy, and are in danger of being depicted thus. while there is much porn and high art that is easy to discern, i argue still that the line is blurry enough for any sort of punitive ban to be difficult to enforce reasonably by your successors. also, what is inspiring to one may be slop to another. while there is much imagery and symbolism that will elicit the identical and similar reactions in all people when shown to them, there is much about art that is uniquely personal. i think we can agree that any art made for the masses ceases to be such, and to limit what is allowed to be created limits the amount of soul allowed to be infused into a piece.
<aryan space
4. i could get into a whole tirade on whether ai does or does not feel or suffer. and i would also argue that there are many people who simply do not understand philosophy in a way that would meaningfully affect them. either way it doesn't matter who or what made a piece of art or a symbol, as the meaning of art is so dependent on the viewer that the artists' intent is often completely lost in the sauce. also, the question was hypothetical. if ai *did* become as sophisticated as a human artist, how would you legislate for that?
<nigger space
5. i am not sure that a one off """"study"""" done by a jewish pedophile is enough to prove or disprove that men are meant to be masculine only and that transgenderism is entirely a sham. while i agree that the rates of full blown transgenderism are overblown by da joos and autogynephiles, i do believe that genuine transgenders exist, even if they are only a fraction of a fraction of the population.

>>100535
6. i find your definiton of masculinity and femininity to be lacking to say the least, and constructed by the culture instead of any "self evident and biological" nature. men are naturally inclined to be creators? sure they are, but that could be said of all people, especially women. they create BABIES. and while i am aware it takes two to tango, men are bereft of any womb to speak of, not to mention the handful of species that practice parthenogenesis. men as the primary provider is also a modern concept, as historically it was both men and women working in the fields to provide food and shelter for themselves and their families. the "provider man" is something only enabled by the sheer material abundance we enjoy today, and the economy of old that allowed (expected) a man to work to provide for his family, while a woman worked beside him, whether it was housemaking, aiding in his business, or in the case of widows, taking over her husband's business completely. it is only because of the patriarchy (i know, i know, but i am not a foid nor a feminist) that women are thought of as soft-handed supporters that require a man to thrive. this is not the case. it is also the patriarchy that requires women to be submissive to men, as in older, and some may say better times, if a woman was to try and have her own way she could simply be beaten and/or raped by her brutish counterpart. and men are not naturally compassionate? what good man lacks compassion for his brothers, for his people? what good father lacks compassion for his children? what good person lacks compassion, and emotional maturity? and what stops women from being pathfinders, and explorers? do their periods attract predators? would their boobs get caught on the foliage? if she is not in the business of getting pregnant there is no reason a woman cannot explore, or provide, or create. but ah, that is just what a woman is for, no? sitting around waiting for her man to get home from slaving away for goldman group so she can get knocked up to rear the next generation of warm bodies to fill factories and offices. and what do you mean when you say "strong"? physical strength, mental fortitude, or something else? you think women are naturally incapable of being mentally strong and strong willed in her goals? what of all the boss babes and hr baddies, the doctors, surgeons and nurses saving lives all across the west? what of the women rearing 20 children at once in war torn africa, struggling every day to get her children to adulthood and keep them out of trouble while trying not to get raped by some wandering army for the thrembillionth time? sorry if i am demeaning, but i simply cannot accept your definitions of man's natures at all.
<nigger space
6b. so tomboys are simply women who are too self conscious to do what, dress and act like a woman should? too afraid to give their sovereignty over to a man? i find it interesting that you have a contempt for femboys while giving tomboys a pass, presuming that all femboys are faggots and sodomites, weak minded and weak willed degenerates that need to "grow up" whereas women are afforded a more nuanced understanding. could it not be that, in spite of the feminine traits a man may possess either naturally or due to his upbringing/environment, that he really might not be as feminine as the terminally online gooners would have you believe and could simply be a man with some interests that women have?
<aryan space
7. i do not trust your judgement in this realm.
<nigger space
8. i would argue that the societal issues we face today are less the fault of loosening stigma around sex/gender and more the fault of the meddling by an elite class that wants to control the masses by way of fear, division, and constant infighting over issues overblown into a constant circus of existential crises. the dissolution of the walls between gender roles would not be such a big problem if the jews werent using mass psychosis to make the sexes hate each other unduly. and yes, i do blame the jews for making the average woman degenerate and retarded. the average man is degenerate and retarded as well.

>>100535
9. i agree completely.
<nigger space
10. i agree with most of this, but i dont think the world you create would be a utopia in the brave new world sense but something more like 50's america with more personal freedoms but more government regulation and less individuality
<aryan space
11. you cannot have both. i suppose you would like a happy medium, but what is good for many is not always good for one. there are many freedoms we give up to make a functioning society, and many more that must be forfeit if you want to perfect it. so i suppose what i was trying to ask is on a scale of anthill to anarchy, where would you put your utopia?
<nigger space
12. i suppose i understand that, it is better to have people knowledgeable about the government to be the ones that have a say over it, but if you make everyone take a test you disallow everyone without the money or ability to learn about politics and the government from having a say about how they are governed, and maybe that's the point. i still think it is unfair, though, to all the people unable to vote. if you mandate a test politicians will only cater to those who can pass it rather than to all people in the nation, and it is also true that just because you are able to pass a test about a subject that does not mean you are truly knowledgeable about it. what would even be on the test itself? would you have to memorize random facts and definitions to pass, or would there be questions on how the examinee would legislate or act in a given scenario?

I don't understand why americans are so keen to aline themselves with politics all the time when almost all of them are useless do nothing goyniggers who are all talk. mutts just talk and talk and talk but say nothing of importance. You wonder why chatrooms are dead during eurohours, this is why, mutts are just like spam bots parroting the same shit over and over again.

this is why there will never be a revolution in the burgerstates of muttmerica, because you just talk and never shut the fuck up about "your view" like your hyper specific opinion is special and even matters.

its not fucking rocket science or special to be based but somehow the moment a mutt takes a redpill it becomes his entire personality

>>100763
the eurokike projects and seethes when he sees the unbothered ameriCHADs discussing eachother's unique take on politics instead of conforming to whatever their pozzed government tells them to think. it is impossible for the yuropisstain to comprehend the ameriGOD's position because they are too concerned with kicking a gay little ball around and choosing which flavor of migrant BBC they want their wife and daughters to be raped by that day. keep seething, keep coping, and keep dreaming about being american even though we all know you people are to meek to even think about leaving your gay little village, much less moving to the land of the free

>>100770
>redditparagraph
How hard is it to say TND and TKD?

>>100760
Thank you for asking questions and responding to my stances, I view this as an opportunity to have my views challenged in a civil-argument way rather then that of some bad-faith debate, there aren't many places you can have conversations like this. as it stands im busy at the moment but I shall reply tomorrow around 3pm EST or otherwise earlier if i find time (i might)
>>100763
its good to have a personal philosophy to not only to help making decisions in life but also having good judgement for the kind of people in your own life. its not good to have friends who have completely conflicting world views and values. Also I DO in fact plan to change the world, i cannot at the current moment because i am legally barred from doing things, let alone the empire i must build for myself beforehand. I dont really see you guys doing anything in Europe besides letting your people get raped? And a gov't that lets it happen.
>>100770
trvke

Detain troll

Tommy parky and salt are my very best friends

>>100898
Maybe you don't SEE us do anything because you gain literally nothing from public attention??? You don't just label yourself so everyone who hates you can target you with their eyes closed. Either way every single country has their own groups, but it's not the same as the US because we (not being mulattos) call for the nationalism of our country and not our "race"

>wdym im a dumb amerimutt and white is white
no you nigger, you fucking hodgepodge. Miscegenation = loss of identity. It's not just a color, what are you? a dumb goy to believe this?

also thank you for satisfying mutts law by mentioning thridies raping everyone, great job.

>>100898
Both our regions are seemingly helplessly tied down by jews, and theres basically no changing this, you have all the guns in the world but george floyd coming back from the dead is more probable than an armed revolution in the US.

>>100898
and of course personal philosophy is important but parroting it endlessly and making it your entire personality is retarded. It should take no more than 5% of your brain.. If you were a computer you would store this shit in your ROM, there are countless more important things for you to study and learn
>amerimutt
Oh wait never mind you think youre a hyper aryan despite working a trade jerb.

i have my own opinions on every individual topic following an ideology is retarded

I like Sayyid Qutb

>>100937
>Maybe you don't SEE us do anything because you gain literally nothing from public attention???
What does this even mean
>You don't just label yourself so everyone who hates you can target you with their eyes closed
I dont just outwardly label myself or first thing start off conversations with my political stand points for this obvious reason
>Miscegenation = loss of identity. It's not just a color, what are you? a dumb goy to believe this?
The rest of your post is too ESLpilled for me to understand it, but if you are talking about loosing one’s identity because of being born in the west and disconnected from ethnic roots they yeah i agree it sucks we’ve lost traditions and things to look back on, but there is nothing i can do about it. Do you want me to kill myself so i can hope to be reincarnated as a pure blooded indian or something?
>>100940
>thread about taking about your political and philosophical stances
>somehow making it my whole personality ev&doe its an anonymous thread on the bald man with glasses website
What are you even trying to say here? No one is doing this
>there are countless more important things for you to study and learn
Not really i would think your underlying principles and values are important so they can point you in the correct direction?
>Oh wait never mind you think youre a hyper aryan despite working a trade jerb.
You eurocucks really have some stick up your ass, nophono thinks this and there is no such thing as a “trade jerb” did you mean trade job?

>>100898
Edit: I am currently busy so i will reply to ur rebuddle whenever i get the chance