i'm really looking forward to having babies with my wife

creating life with my penis

I am legit creating life with my penis

i like the youtube vidyas obviously bruh

like I have had all the same thoughts, plus I've seen divorce corp. a couple times. I'm mgtow friendly

not sure how to answer that lmao

@shadowlessnexus not here to troll but if there's a debate-type channel I'm in

isn't rationalmale married?

wait you think rationalmale isn't mgtow?

so I'll tell you guys kind of where I'm at

so I've definitely thought along the same lines as far as men/women having different standards of love, females being fundamentally different/incapable of a relationship, etc.

but ultimately I don't think it's really that bad

babies are pretty awesome though

I want one

jesus 🤦

not a bad choice lol

hey do you guys like kpop

divorce corp. is an excellent movie

i've been interested in manosphere stuff since like 2010

haha I cracked the code

but yeah I'm an internet elder

yup

it didn't highlight though

i'm only aware of 1 of me..

yes i got a highlight on the prev

kk

still here

@Whats gay anymore what makes you interested in history

WTF

why is everyone here doing history

that is so weird

do you guys like tolstoy?

or the stoics?

hey are you guys all atheist

agnostic? don't be a fag man pick a side

🐻

@everyone I wrote a few blog posts defending closed borders, thoughts? https://activeobjectivism.com/2019/02/17/closed-borders-a-rights-based-defense/

I'm having trouble getting any coherent criticisms, trying to ask around to other audiences..

right I knew there would be people with a gut negative reaction having something to do with "social contract", i just can't seem to get any coherent reasoning on the problem here

I've gotten a lot of positive feedback though, so I'm not sure if they just can't mount a reasonable attack on this or what

and it's not like I disagree with that argument, of course there should be a signed contract. for a government like the US, it was intended to be voluntary and contractual, and this idea of birthright citizenship is a huge mistake in the implementation, we need to correct it

but on the other hand, these whiney, victim-mentality arguments that you're being subjected to things against your will, are totally BS. you *can* still opt out, you are totally free to do that at any time by renouncing your citizenship. I really don't want to hear you whine about how "taxation is theft"

it shouldn't be lengthy or expensive, that's another flaw with our current system

@C1PHER that would be a legitimate option if it came down to it. ideally it's something that could be worked out through the system. and yes a rights-respecting limited government would have to recognize the right of any citizen to opt out, for any state to secede, and for their rights to be respected so long as they aren't some kind of aggressive threat to its citizens

another related point here...

"libertarianism" = "liberty"-ism

"liberty" is not radical autonomy, it's freedom from force, it's respect for individual rights.

People need to stop talking about "moral libertarianism", what you're thinking of is "moral anarchism".

my latest blog post for anyone who's interested: https://activeobjectivism.com/2019/03/07/criteria-for-citizenship/

curious to hear your thoughts

sounds good. @micamike45 I'll reply sometime this weekend

I've been working on a series of blog posts on rights-respecting arguments against open borders, here's my latest: https://activeobjectivism.com/2019/03/07/criteria-for-citizenship/

let me know your thoughts

🇺🇸

"What the civic nationalist system intends to recognize is that there is a separation of concerns – the government is for one specific kind of purpose: the defense of people’s rights and the institution of justice – and that is all the government per se is concerned with, whereas private organizations are thereby free to fulfill all other kinds of concerns, including cultural, religious, and so on."

https://activeobjectivism.com/2019/08/17/qa-on-civic-nationalism/

"What the civic nationalist system intends to recognize is that there is a separation of concerns – the government is for one specific kind of purpose: the defense of people’s rights and the institution of justice – and that is all the government per se is concerned with, whereas private organizations are thereby free to fulfill all other kinds of concerns, including cultural, religious, and so on."

https://activeobjectivism.com/2019/08/17/qa-on-civic-nationalism/

wait there's a debate tonight?

substituting force in place of reason and law leads to irrational violence and destruction

ah yes so 3 jews = all jews

it's their intrinsic dirty jewishness which makes those 3 jews evil, not something else entirely

anti-semitism is pure malevolent irrationality. just fuck off with it

malevolent, irrational people can list as many bad people as they want, and point to "jewishness" as the cause of all the evils in the world, while ignoring the other attributes of these people. these bad people are successful businessmen - is being a good businessman inherently evil? no. they are high IQ - is being high IQ inherently evil? no. they are leftists - is being a leftist inherently evil? no, no, no... it's their jewishness which makes them evil. why? no answer. does it follow from the religious tenets of judaism? no. is it racial, are all people of this race evil? no there are lots of really moral people, successful doctors and scientists and other just normal good people of that race. so what is it, why anti-semitism? the answer is, it's a scapegoat for a malevolent, resentful psychological disorder.

that's what *they* are saying bud

they are not attributing the evilness to leftism, which would make a LOT of sense, or to being a good businessman, which makes NO sense, they are attributing the evil to *jewishness*

it's specifically this lack of a rational investigation into causes which is what marks this not as a reasoned position worthy of debate, but as a kind of psychological disorder.

any cursory causal analysis points pretty obviously to a leftist/postmodernist worldview as being fundamental to the problem, and not something having to do with jews

my answer is that that's total nonsense to the point of my default assumption being that it's in bad faith. orthodox jews who take their scriptures and convictions most seriously and scholarly are moral, right-wing people who reject all forms of this postmodern degeneracy as despicable evil. there is absolutely no case for it being a logical consequence of the religion itself. the same people who blame jews will also blame America's libertarian founding political principles for the moral degeneracy we see today. again, it is not the outcome of any process of rational investigation into root causes - no such process was undertaken. it's the result of a malevolent, resentful psychological disorder, seeking a scapegoat.

spinoza is good but has some issues imo

like other moderns, he still too radically departs from aristotelianism

there can be only one..?

@ComradeChaos I don't know what that means... explain?

numerology is nonsense right?

well yeah of course. assigning numbers to letters and so on is unnatural and not based in reason

well yeah I'm almost certain, but I'm asking you to explain

can you give an example?

do you have an example

@ComradeChaos do you have an example or no?

Design by committee. It's AGILE

2 weeks