[ home / overboard ] [ bpa ] [ soy / qa / raid / r ] [ craft ] [ int / pol ] [ a / an / asp / biz / mtv / r9k / tech / v / sude / x ] [ q / news / chive / rules / pass / bans / status ] [ wiki / booru / irc ]

A banner for soyjak.party

/soy/ - Soyjaks

liquidphonos have infiltrated /soy/
Catalog
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Password (For file deletion.)

File: download.png 📥︎ (20.54 KB, 300x480) ImgOps

 15981649[Quote]

You cannot reverse-engineer human history. The West went through the Enlightenment, the Scientific Revolution, the formulation of universal human rights, and the industrial/digital revolutions.

These users want to hit a "reset" button to return to a mythical, hyper-traditional past where men were tribal warlords. But you cannot convince modern populations—who are used to modern medicine, global communication, and individual rights—to suddenly adopt the morality of 8th-century Vikings or 1st-century heretics. It is historical cosplay, not a viable political strategy.

 15981735[Quote]

Listen up, /pol/ LARPers and armchair Wotanists, because it's time to drop
the 19th-century phrenology and learn some actual history. The biological "Aryan
Race" is a complete and utter myth. It’s Victorian fanfiction.

Let’s look at the etymology. The word "Aryan" comes from the Sanskrit word arya
and the Old Persian ariya. It literally just meant "noble" or "honorable." It
was a cultural and linguistic identifier used by ancient Indo-Iranian peoples.
The ONLY people in human history who historically called themselves "Aryans"
were the ancestors of modern-day Iranians and Northern Indians. (Fun fact: The
name "Iran" literally translates to "Land of the Aryans"). They did not look
like Swedish fitness models.

So how did it become a blonde, blue-eyed European master race? Because in
the 1800s, European linguists realized Sanskrit was related to Greek and Latin
(the Indo-European language family). Then, pseudoscientists like Arthur de
Gobineau completely botched the science, assumed that shared language meant
shared blood, and hallucinated a mythical race of Nordic conquerors coming out
of the ice to build civilization. The Nazis took this bad linguistics, slapped
some runes on it, and turned it into state religion.

Modern genetics completely nuked this. We have mapped the genome. European
ancestry isn't a pure "Aryan" bloodline; it's a massive genetic mutt-mix of
three entirely distinct groups who migrated over thousands of years: Western
Hunter-Gatherers, Early European Farmers (who migrated from Anatolia/modern
Turkey), and the Yamnaya steppe pastoralists.

There is no "Aryan DNA." There is no ancient, pure-blooded white warrior race.
You are genetically linking yourself to a linguistic term used by ancient
Persian goat herders because a 19th-century French aristocrat didn't understand
how language families worked. Put down the esoteric racial manifestos, log
off 4chan, and read a modern genetics textbook.

 15981747[Quote]

>>15981649 (OP)
>>15981735
Can you 2 nerds leave we're trying to have a party and no one wants to hear your talk

 15981765[Quote]

>You cannot reverse-engineer human history. The West went through the Enlightenment, the Scientific Revolution, the formulation of universal human rights, and the industrial/digital revolutions.
No one said that they wanna erease everything those brought
>who are used to modern medicine, global communication, and individual rights
When the system fails to provide those, people will force change to happen
Replying to bait is aryan btw.

 15981796[Quote]

>>15981747
a party? Like a soyjak party? Ö

 15981800[Quote]

File: TVRKNVKE.png 📥︎ (1.97 MB, 1174x1474) ImgOps

>Listen up, /pol/ LARPers and armchair Wotanists, because it's time to drop
>the 19th-century phrenology and learn some actual history. The biological "Aryan
>Race" is a complete and utter myth. It's Victorian fanfiction.
<i am a tvrkaryan living in jew york btw
>Let's look at the etymology. The word "Aryan" comes from the Sanskrit word arya
>and the Old Persian ariya. It literally just meant "noble" or "honorable." It
>was a cultural and linguistic identifier used by ancient Indo-Iranian peoples.
>The ONLY people in human history who historically called themselves "Aryans"
>were the ancestors of modern-day Iranians and Northern Indians. (Fun fact: The
>name "Iran" literally translates to "Land of the Aryans"). They did not look
>like Swedish fitness models.
<ankara 1#
>So how did it become a blonde, blue-eyed European master race? Because in
>the 1800s, European linguists realized Sanskrit was related to Greek and Latin
>(the Indo-European language family). Then, pseudoscientists like Arthur de
>Gobineau completely botched the science, assumed that shared language meant
>shared blood, and hallucinated a mythical race of Nordic conquerors coming out
>of the ice to build civilization. The Nazis took this bad linguistics, slapped
>some runes on it, and turned it into state religion.
<tvrkey is most aryan nation
>Modern genetics completely nuked this. We have mapped the genome. European
>ancestry isn't a pure "Aryan" bloodline; it's a massive genetic mutt-mix of
>three entirely distinct groups who migrated over thousands of years: Western
>Hunter-Gatherers, Early European Farmers (who migrated from Anatolia/modern
>Turkey), and the Yamnaya steppe pastoralists.
<throw rocks at greekbigots
>There is no "Aryan DNA." There is no ancient, pure-blooded white warrior race.
>You are genetically linking yourself to a linguistic term used by ancient
>Persian goat herders because a 19th-century French aristocrat didn't understand
>how language families worked. Put down the esoteric racial manifestos, log
>off 4chan, and read a modern genetics textbook.

 15981801[Quote]

>>15981765
I will gladly take the bait.

You are raising two very specific, classic counter-arguments from within the
dissident right/alt-right sphere. Let's break them down analytically, because
you are touching on the exact ideological framework these groups use to justify
their worldview: Reactionary Modernism and Accelerationism.

Here is why, even granting your premises, the ideology still collapses under its
own weight.

1. "No one said they wanna erase everything those brought"

You are correct that the far-right does not want to give up modern medicine, the
internet, or space travel. They are not anarcho-primitivists.

What you are describing is a well-documented political phenomenon called
Reactionary Modernism (or in modern European New Right terms, Archeofuturism).
It is the desire to combine hyper-advanced technology with ancient, brutal,
hierarchical social structures. They want Star Trek technology, but with the
morality of Sparta or the Third Reich.

The Flaw in this Thinking: You cannot surgically separate the technological
fruits of the Enlightenment from the philosophical roots of the Enlightenment.

The far-right wants to keep the science, but they absolutely do want to erase
the philosophy: universal human rights, egalitarianism, democracy, and the
social contract. But historically, scientific and economic explosions happen
because of open, free-thinking societies where information flows freely,
meritocracy replaces rigid caste systems, and diverse minds collaborate.

If you institute a rigid, hyper-authoritarian ethno-state that purges
"impurities" and relies on dogmatic racial myths, you kill the exact
intellectual environment that fosters innovation. Totalitarian states can build
good weapons for a short time (like V2 rockets), but they eventually stagnate
because ideological purity tests destroy independent thought. You can’t have
Silicon Valley in a society governed by the rules of Wotan.

2. "When the system fails to provide those, people will force change to happen"

This is a mathematically sound sociological observation. It is also the exact
premise of Accelerationism, which is heavily promoted on /pol/.

The theory is: Liberal democracy ("the system") is fragile. If the economy
crashes, or if crime and social trust break down enough, people will abandon
"universal rights" in a heartbeat in exchange for security, food, and order.
Therefore, the extreme right waits for (or tries to accelerate) the collapse of
the system so they can step in as the brutal-but-effective alternative.

The Flaw in this Thinking: It is true that starving, desperate people will
accept authoritarianism. But just because a system fails doesn't mean the 4chan
poster's specific alternative becomes viable or correct.

If the global system collapses, the people surviving the rubble are not going to
suddenly care about Aryan genetics, they are going to care about water logistics, agriculture, and
local defense.

The /pol/ fantasy assumes that after the collapse, society will default to their
specific brand of white-nationalist, neo-pagan neo-fascism. In reality, a total
systemic collapse would result in fractured, hyper-local warlordism that would
look a lot more like the Bronze Age collapse or a Mad Max movie than a unified,
glorious West.

Summary

The alt-right thinks they can hack history. They think they can rip out the
foundation of the modern world (liberalism, human rights,
universalism) while somehow keeping the penthouse suite (high technology, global
power, high standards of living).

They view society as a machine where you can just swap out the "Democracy"
motherboard for a "Wotan Fascism" motherboard and the machine will still run. It
won't. The machine will catch fire.

 15981803[Quote]

File: 1767108822377u.png 📥︎ (239.23 KB, 1024x1024) ImgOps

>>>15981765
>I will gladly take the bait.
>
>You are raising two very specific, classic counter-arguments from within the
>dissident right/alt-right sphere. Let's break them down analytically, because
>you are touching on the exact ideological framework these groups use to justify
>their worldview: Reactionary Modernism and Accelerationism.
>
>Here is why, even granting your premises, the ideology still collapses under its
>own weight.
>
>1. "No one said they wanna erase everything those brought"
>
>You are correct that the far-right does not want to give up modern medicine, the
>internet, or space travel. They are not anarcho-primitivists.
>
>What you are describing is a well-documented political phenomenon called
>Reactionary Modernism (or in modern European New Right terms, Archeofuturism).
>It is the desire to combine hyper-advanced technology with ancient, brutal,
>hierarchical social structures. They want Star Trek technology, but with the
>morality of Sparta or the Third Reich.
>
>The Flaw in this Thinking: You cannot surgically separate the technological
>fruits of the Enlightenment from the philosophical roots of the Enlightenment.
>
>The far-right wants to keep the science, but they absolutely do want to erase
>the philosophy: universal human rights, egalitarianism, democracy, and the
>social contract. But historically, scientific and economic explosions happen
>because of open, free-thinking societies where information flows freely,
>meritocracy replaces rigid caste systems, and diverse minds collaborate.
>
>If you institute a rigid, hyper-authoritarian ethno-state that purges
>"impurities" and relies on dogmatic racial myths, you kill the exact
>intellectual environment that fosters innovation. Totalitarian states can build
>good weapons for a short time (like V2 rockets), but they eventually stagnate
>because ideological purity tests destroy independent thought. You can’t have
>Silicon Valley in a society governed by the rules of Wotan.
>
>2. "When the system fails to provide those, people will force change to happen"
>
>This is a mathematically sound sociological observation. It is also the exact
>premise of Accelerationism, which is heavily promoted on /pol/.
>
>The theory is: Liberal democracy ("the system") is fragile. If the economy
>crashes, or if crime and social trust break down enough, people will abandon
>"universal rights" in a heartbeat in exchange for security, food, and order.
>Therefore, the extreme right waits for (or tries to accelerate) the collapse of
>the system so they can step in as the brutal-but-effective alternative.
>
>The Flaw in this Thinking: It is true that starving, desperate people will
>accept authoritarianism. But just because a system fails doesn't mean the 4chan
>poster's specific alternative becomes viable or correct.
>
>If the global system collapses, the people surviving the rubble are not going to
>suddenly care about Aryan genetics, they are going to care about water logistics, agriculture, and
>local defense.
>
>The /pol/ fantasy assumes that after the collapse, society will default to their
>specific brand of white-nationalist, neo-pagan neo-fascism. In reality, a total
>systemic collapse would result in fractured, hyper-local warlordism that would
>look a lot more like the Bronze Age collapse or a Mad Max movie than a unified,
>glorious West.
>
>Summary
>
>The alt-right thinks they can hack history. They think they can rip out the
>foundation of the modern world (liberalism, human rights,
>universalism) while somehow keeping the penthouse suite (high technology, global
>power, high standards of living).
>
>They view society as a machine where you can just swap out the "Democracy"
>motherboard for a "Wotan Fascism" motherboard and the machine will still run. It
>won't. The machine will catch fire.



[Return][Catalog][Go to top][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / overboard ] [ bpa ] [ soy / qa / raid / r ] [ craft ] [ int / pol ] [ a / an / asp / biz / mtv / r9k / tech / v / sude / x ] [ q / news / chive / rules / pass / bans / status ] [ wiki / booru / irc ]