My hero Bernie Sanders, who towers as the most admired Jewish man in the entire World, emerged as the star of the Democratic convention this evening. When he came out to speak, the crowd went wild, cheering so long and so loud, that it looked like he’d never be able to speak.
As the camera panned the crowd, so many people were crying at the mere sight of Bernie. Crying about what could have been. Grieving for a President who should have been. Looking out at all his screaming fans, Sanders himself almost lost composure and started crying himself.
The contrast between the enthusiasm for Sanders and the tepid response to the Elizabeth Warren speech he followed was stark. Warren was even heckled by protesters who shouted “we trusted you”.
Many on the progressive left had hoped Elizabeth Warren would have dived in and challenged Hillary for the Democratic nomination. When she was too scared to do so, they had hoped she would at least endorse Bernie Sanders, who was a much better fit with her progressive values than Hillary is. But sadly, either because of jealousy or political opportunism, she refused to back anyone, and her silence cost Bernie the nomination.
Once Hillary secured the nomination, Warren then endorsed Hillary and emerged as an extreme attack dog against Donald Trump, shaming him for acquiring his wealth through inheritance and cheating others.
I actually find Warren, who shakes and trembles as she delivers her scathing anti-Trump tirades to be quite unintentionally comical, and ask, where is Saturday Night Live to impersonate this clown? But alas, they’re in the tank for Hillary, so no mocking her supporters.
But it’s easy for Warren, as a Democrat, to attack Trump. The real courage would have been in supporting Bernie over Hillary. Where was she when we needed her?
Pumpkin Person 
bernie’s people should take the long view.
trump’s election will kill conservatism forever.
that is, the “never trump” republicans will be marginalized and thus what noam chomsky has called, “the most dangerous organization in human history” will be transformed into a populist party. a party that will work with the democrats and agree with the democrats on a lot.
hillary’s election, trump’s loss, will kill trumpism.
and it will business as usual in dc.
hillary will be an even greater disappointment than obama.
she is their puppet, and they pull the strings.
hillary’s immigration and trade inclination is extremely conservative/anti-progressive…right out of the wall street journal’s editorial page.
He agrees with citizens united….which caused a lot of these “corruption” issues.
He speaks out both sides of his mouth, and because he has no political record people latch unto what they want (“he’s going to save the working man”; “he loves Israel”; “he only hates ILLEGALS, not legals”; “he’s going to deport all the coloreds”), they do conflict with each other.
Ultimately, although they’re are labor concerns influencing people to vote for Trump, it’s about “ethnic” and to a lesser extent raw racial decline.
The religious right are not cucks. They will be the future of the “Pro-White” because Trumpkins are batshit insane, generally speaking.
Tam Tancredo, Pat Buchanan, Steve King, Jeff Sessions are all possibilities for 2020 GOP (or party splinter) nominee.
They will, as you say, surely go populist, in that regard, for a time, but the “Southern Strategy” will continue intensified from 2024 onward.
The only hope is the Democrats run a Bernie-esque type candidate in 2024. Then the new GOP will fall to garbage.
Bernie steals the show, but HRC steals the nomination.
Checkmate!
Hey Videla, thanks for bringing up Sein und Zeit. Starting out and it’s already very impressive.
Trollollolloll that book is bullshit if you don’t read it in the original German.
Well actually all philosophy is bullshit.
Well said.
https://www.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/Philosophy/axioms/axioms/node46.html
Philosophy is trash. Especially morality. Moral judgements are post hoc searches for justification for our beliefs.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/07/11/the-evolution-of-morality/
The first link has a ton of examples on it.
Why do you say philosophy is bullshit?
For morality, philosophy won’t explain it but science will and the caddis evolution.
The only two trash I’m seeing here are two of you.
This is the problem of ” humanity ”. The most idiots are not less intelligent, the most idiots are one of the ” more ” smart. Stupidity can also be measured as what is the probability of unrestricted access to power and therefore power of impact.
Place the RaceRealist medicist or Zion-african here, and we’ll see.
Hbd is living proof that the biggest problem is not the least intelligent, still a big problem, the biggest problem is the stupid who was born with a little more gray matter in the brain, the similarities between the stupid-stupid, stupid-smart are large, must be why they tend to be hierarchical and social synergy.
The philosophy is mankind’s ego end-game is the beginning and the end of thought.
True philosophy is a terrifying simplicity. The big problem has been that a lot of pseudo-philosophers, intellectuals careerists, which has complicated the simple and objective nature of philosophy.
It is the destruction of the human world, crude transcendentally, hybrid, between reason, still in its wake, and the brutality of instinct, amplified by higher cognitive capacity of the human being.
I wonder if the average smart white is stupid, that is, not-wise, imagine how foolish must be intelligent average black …
even worst***
because it seems so.
Those who do not understand the importance of philosophy as a kind of final judgment, to place the human plague in his place, as another species lost in the cosmos immensity, are precisely those who aspire to play indefinitely human stupidity: adapted psychosis .
The science is ” useful ” because it produces things to humans. Philosophy is omniscient because it says to human beings after all, the most important is that science itself is merely distraction.
Good judgment most often defines the scientific achievements.
Philosophy is the consciousness of all other human sciences, including the science itself.
Western decadence is caused mainly because it lacks philosophical intelligence to most Westerners, the analytical-critical and reflective thinking.
YOU goys for example.
Immanuel Kant wrote a book on Anthropology with a philosophical leaning, which is almost HBD in nature.
He said that East Asians were less humanitarian than Europeans, because they don’t operate on reason, but on power and ostentation. East Asians are the most materialistic of all the groups and follow the status quo to their utmost. He also said in relation that they as a people are servile to authoritarianism – JV’s concept of the obedient, striving East Asian.
Kant also critiqued the Anglo Proles as a people without an identity. They operate strictly on a individual level, hence their downfall as a nation or a cultural group.
Fascinating and still being talked about, after a few hundred years!
Yeah, philosophy is not bullshit.
The most interesting about well many hbds speaking shit about philosophy is that philosophers had been observed the so-called hbd science since a long time.
”conservatoids” types seems have problem to understand that
…
there was a past before hbd
I agree that much of modern philosophy, especially that is popularized today, it is very stupid. But that does not condemn the whole class at the same faith.
lack of
not, critical, analytical or reflective thinking,
we can summarize it
lack of
GOOD/BETTER thinking
i know, i’ts hurt, seems extremely easy in theory, but tend to be more complicated in the practic.
to think better many times will mean
sacrifice your own ignorance-comfort
all of us have, me included, of course.
is not
”people can’t understand”
is much deeply and less ”cognitive”
is psychological
”people can’t ACCEPT”
understand truisms is easy,
accept truisms that are directly against some thing about you that is precious (you see such as precious) IS the true learning.
Perhaps Kant has the answer as to why East Asians do not make inroads in Anglo Prole nations.
Their personalities are quite the opposite of what Anglo prole nations expect of its intelligent citizens. Individuals who are unique, defiant and outspoken…sociopathic, East Asians are not!
Basically, especially the Chinese are petty materialists.
Truly wealthy tycoons of the Western Persuasion tend to be progressive in some sense. Yes, some create jobs and provide opportunities.
East Asians make boring elites…because they only care about ostentation, the display of wealth, superficial and nothing else.
East asians SEEMS specially chineses and koreans tend to be more materialistic but not ambitious, while SOME ”people” (ancient ((mafia))) are both…
excess of neanderthal ancestry ”may” have some impact here if subsaharian africans are, on avg, the more extroverted/emotionally reactive of the human beings.
materialism is one of the most popular and important of the human distractions to avoid your-self your-faith, the existential uncertainty…
cultures were invention to fill this instinctive hiatus that human boings looses,
culture is the reorganization of the old new world order, common place in nature.
ambition is the extra-emotional component to the competitive behavior that east asians on avg lack.
east asians have low level of the same social competition that we see in the ”west”.
Every psychological trait that is universal will tend to be lower-intensity among east asians, average among euro-caucasoids and higher among subsaharian blacks, i mean, the populations who are demographically prevalent among the three macro-races.
yes.
the neologisms of macquarrie and robinson i just substituted with heidegger’s own neologisms.
that made it a lot easier to understand. the same goes for hegel’s The Phenomenology of Spirit.
no.
all philosophy is not bullshit.
but almost all 20 the century and contemporary french and anglo-american philosophy is bullshit.
but then again it’s not really philosophy at all.
there’s nothing bullshit about The Critique of Pure Reason or aristotle or plato.
Being in Time is very difficult to understand, but this is because what heidegger is trying to say simply can’t be said in ordinary language.
heidegger was a german after all. he was not intentionally obscure.
i really can’t figure out why JS would admire lacan. the guy was a total charlatan. he really was just bs.
…almost all 20th century …
Being and Time…
in fact the first few times i read the first half of Being and TIme i hardly understood any of it.
but i kept at it and finally i “got it”.
the aha moment was when i saw what heidegger later called the “ontological difference”…the difference between Being and beings…Sein and seiendes.
one might first read heidegger’s later Introduction to Metaphysics or Franz Brentano’s book On the Manifold Meaning of Being in Aristotle…
these will make Being and Time much easier to understand i think.
Yes, Lacan was a total fraud.
However, Lacan was not a fraud, when it came to Anglo Proles. He thought Anglo Proles were just delusional, boring, pushy, striving, and one dimensional.
You’ll see Lacan was disliked by Jews. He beat them in their own game.
Freud’s Psychoanalysis has no validity, and a complete sham of a discipline. He never got anywhere with it.
Lacan was a gentile, a Frenchman, turns this Freudian garbage into an art, while bashing the Anglo Proles and their Jew henchmen in America, as rather being unimaginative and tasteless in life.
East Asians in the West, are predominantly found in Anglo Prole nations, for one specific reason or commonality. The lust for money or materialism, and the process that comes with it. However, they lose because of one specific reason of not pushing it to new heights, as seen by the proletariat (or White Americans) or Jews. They have one train of thought that East Asians lack — the idea of being an individual with delusions of grandeur through acts of progress. Thus, East Asians make the most boring elites, in countries that demand some form of accountability for their wealth.
Melo check Duke like out.
Moral philosophy is bullshit, because moral reasoning evolved through evolution and it evolved because jt increased out fitness.
Who’s right? Who’s wrong? What’s good? What’s evil? The answers you get will differ, how do you know who’s right? Hell, even morality is different based on culture.
Philosophy is a distraction now that we have science. It’s just people arguing over things that can’t be empirically proven so I don’t care for it
Avg hbd is a retarded sociopath…
moral is the ultimate logic
logic is what make the existence existent
a sucessive logical/balanced/harmonic events make the life possible in this planet
moral reasoning is just the expansion of this logic just like a force field
out of your own ego
without ”this inhumane ’empathy’ ” life would not possible
and again
is not because most of all humanity is idiotic you included that morality itself will be falatious… or have a ”scientific and superior/accurate meaning”
”increase fitness/health” don’t mean imoral to me
but there is some things that humans can do better than other nonhumans like care about people who don’t give any direct advantage to yourself
Philosophy in the ideal world IS the light to guide us in a dark future
science is make by childish pretend to be wise adults
some them who use it to hurt innocent guinea pigs
”East Asians in the West, are predominantly found in Anglo Prole nations, for one specific reason or commonality. The lust for money or materialism, and the process that comes with it. ”
probably pretty right
so then rape your mother, expose yourself to children, steal, and murder.
hitler was guided by aesthetics, part of morality.
Philosophy have their goddess ”wisdom”
”we are doing it right**”
Science have their goddess ”creativity”
”we are doing it right!!!”
Science is a tool to the mundane human societies, philosophy only can be a threat, specially to the retarded sociopaths.
the pseudo-philosophers, a lot of them of academia are just like a ”scientist of the system”.
scientist is a job, a worker identity
philosopher is not a job itself, is fundamentally a identity itself, i mean, a existential identity, the pure human trying to understand the reality in a intimate/ultimate way, ultimately honest.
science do it most part of the time without really access the moral/final judgment
philosophy is a end-game to the food chain. science is a fuel to the food chain.
”even” many animals make scientific inventions, just look to the tools invented by primates. what almost of the non-human animals can’t do is to think wisely…
science invent industrialized food with their packaging, is the fundamental technique of the capitalism, irresponsible creativity IS a fundamental tool to the success of the capitalism.
Philosophy ask pertinent but impopular questions,
why so much product-variety**
why so much packaging***
is the responsibility, the real use of new brain regions, so-called rational area.
Santo
“moral is the ultimate logic
logic is what make the existence existent”
So how come most moral reasoning is just a post hoc search for reasons to justify judgements we already made? Look into Jonathan Haidts research.
Morality has an evolutionary basis. The search for ‘truth’ has an evolutionary basis.
You’re playing with the meaning of the words
you’re saying the same thing but thowing away the ultimate meaning of it
the fact tha morality have a evolutionary basis DON’T go against the fact that morality also has a philosophical basis.
you are just ” rationalizing ” sociopathy.
keep it up and his beloved Mezzogiorno will turn in Africa,
swallow your tears
or ceases to be contradictory creature!!!!
This is just the bullshit ”morality is relative”
again
subjective morality is relative
objective morality is not
So
beauty is relative for you RaceRealist***
NO
is not**
there is a relativity of the beauty in the same way there is a objectivity of the beauty
same for morality,
😉
good night
Race realist
Moral philosophy is incredibly subjective. I will agree with you there but only because the biggest problem is where you are deriving your ought from. There is no universal moral system. That’s why I base mine in evolutionary ethics. I am tribal, everyone is but my tribal tendencies are on the species level. I’m typing this from an iPhone so please forgive the oversimplification of my thoughts
JS-
I suppose Asians provide “quick relief” in Silicon valley type things (immigrants may drive down wages, etc). and as pp says due to low rates of psychosis may not be as creative….
some might negatively construe them as “tools”…….
JS- You said you emigrated moved to Canada under the “start-up” business program.
That seems to be, at least this point, the only way I could emigrate to Canada.
I’m unfamiliar with startups/that whole online thing, I wondered if you could give me any pointers.
I’m not sure when/if to start the process, if Trump wins I’m going to try to get out immediately. If not, I can wait a few years. I’m currently a College student who will probably need to wait until after the election to even initiate the process….
If anyone has any other tips on how to GTFO of the U.S., and fast, please respond to this comment.
me too, unless trump IS elected.
JS probably promised to invest a certain amount.
he also said at one time he would do it with a student visa.
many countries have citizenship for sale, but it’s a million pounds in the uk, or was last time i checked.
some countries also prefer people with ancestors from that country.
the uk gives preference to those with at least one british grand parent.
but the easiest way for an american is probably to go to school in the country and acquire a degree in high demand in that country…then get a job in that country as a result.
but even though tuition is free and instruction in english in many euro countries, you’d still have to pay for “living expenses”.
i assume student loans can cover this, but i don’t know.
I dunno. The most recent European immigrant ancestors I have were Great-Great Grandparents; 5 being born in Spain (father’s side) and 2 great-great-great grandparents in what is now Germany (or what is now the Czech Republic- the problem is I don’t know!- on the mother’s side)
Investment requirements are high…
even in places like Dominica…………….
Although it may be treason to say so,
WHEN Cuba becomes an enemy of the U.S. again, after Trumpenreich abandons them and myself….
a reverse “boato” or whatever Cubans are called now, may be in order…….
as a “dissident” so to speak.
Will the Cuban navy shoot someone doing that down?
I can just show them my Birth Certificate, and then link that to my dad’s, whose parents birthplace is listed as Cuba (correctly).
*90 miles*
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTpuX2EkM2_MDwPKeuJBM1gSDElO7kVqimDI6xzQ03XuzCB1qYI5A
stupid Obummer!
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/24.5472105,-81.7952477/23.1663333,-81.8418797/@23.3327568,-81.4235934,8.38z
racists love cubans…white cubans.
indigenous oaxacans not so much.
greatest chess player ever was a cuban.
religious people and artists, performers also have an exemption in the uk at least.
sounds like JS may be a dealer in rare books.
that’s a one man operation.
as long as you’re not competing with the locals for jobs, they may let you in.
other countries just want to make sure you won’t compete for jobs and won’t be a burden on tax payers.
in other words, you’ll leave the US and find that the whole rest of the developed world has trump-ian like immigration policies ALREADY!
you may hate trump for other reasons, but his immigration policies are just america catching up to the rest of the world.
i had a neighbor who left for holland.
but he was a CPA who worked for one of the big global accounting firms. i assume it’s the one with its hq in holland, namely KPMG.
there’s some black floridian who has a youtube channel from denmark, but he works for vestas. he worked for them in florida and was relocated.
but i wouldn’t count on getting a job with a multinational and being relocated.
peepee may know.
her parents came to canada in a submarine from colombia.
there was only enough room for mr and mrs peepee and 10 tons of cocaine.
it was a small submarine.
Jorge-
they do love Cubans, or at least the not ‘hybridized Black’ ones that are around 65 to 80% of the pop. now adays…..
BUT
the new Alt-Reich is full of retards.
I mean RETARDS;
They literally just repeat mantras and “shitposting” has no elements of satire/mockery/humor in it, typically.
Old and/or educated White racists do.
But not the other types…….
Although “Panda@war” claimed on Robert Lindsay’s blog that the success of both Cubans and Haitians in the states was attributabal to their Chinese ancestry (imported to work in the fields down there)
like this guy….
he’s probably now being led around by a bunch of youthful anti-semitic Pleb shitposters………
if he didn’t overdose on crystal meth;
being taken for a ride.
I’d say however MOST Alt-Reichers do know the difference between Chollo and Spaniard…..
they just
1. Don’t care
2. Assume all non-Spanish Hispanics are mixed somewhere down the line
3. Use it to manipulate the dumb Alt-Reichers.
https://antifascismnews.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/jaredtaylor.jpg?w=624&h=372&crop=1
This mofo sold Oaxacans and other Spaniards up river….
with his token Mexicant….
they all think he’s a Jew anyway…
when Trumpenreich comes he’ll be gassed!
*if you play with fire long enough, you’re bound to get burned*
Jorge-
they do love Cubans, or at least the not ‘hybridized Black’ ones that are around 65 to 80% of the pop. now adays…..
BUT
the new Alt-Reich is not too bright.
They literally just repeat mantras and ‘jokes’ has no elements of satire/mockery/humor in it, typically.
Old and/or educated White racialists do.
But not the other types…….
Although “Panda@war” claimed on Robert Lindsay’s blog that the success of both Cubans and Haitians in the states was attributabal to their Chinese ancestry (imported to work in the fields down there)
like this guy….
he’s probably now being led around by a bunch of youthful anti-semitic Plebs.
if he didn’t overdose on crystal meth;
being taken for a ride.
I’d say however MOST Alt-Reichers do know the difference between Chollo and Spaniard…..
they just
1. Don’t care
2. Assume all non-Spanish Hispanics are mixed somewhere down the line
3. Use it to manipulate the lesser intellected Alt-Reichers.
https://antifascismnews.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/jaredtaylor.jpg?w=624&h=372&crop=1
This guy sold Oaxacans and other Spaniards up river….
with his token Mexicant….
they all think he’s a Jew anyway…
when Trumpenreich comes he’ll be gassed!
*if you play with fire long enough, you’re bound to get burned*
“Mr. and Mrs. Peepee”
Best laugh I’ve had in a while!
”1Race realist
Moral philosophy is incredibly subjective. I will agree with you there but only because the biggest problem is where you are deriving your ought from. There is no universal moral system. That’s why I base mine in evolutionary ethics. I am tribal, everyone is but my tribal tendencies are on the species level. I’m typing this from an iPhone so please forgive the oversimplification of my thoughts”1
You’re just a retarded autistic…
if moral philosophy is incredibly, wonderfully subjective as this mental disordered said so i can beat you ’cause you’re just a retarded autistic…
incredibly subjective
IS NOT
”because this attitude is universal wrong, ‘scientifically’, objectively wrong”
don’t cry about ”bullying”, you deserve it, free in your assp
Oh gosh, you’re a eternal ‘pretend to be something superior’ but in the end you’re nothing…
yeaaah, so a speciecist should to think about ”autism relevance in the inhuman pool”, 😉
Raceirrealist accept everything that hbd researchers study
less when they say ”wrong” things about their precious southern italians…
all of your ”scientific” narrative down on earth completely when someone say hard truth about your precious people on Mezzogiorno.
You guys no have complete or perfectionist moral capacity to talk about moral.
the belief in god existence is incredibly subjective too*
IS NOT because we have billions of morons polluting the earth ground that morality in its pure meaning will be subjected to the moron level of the moral understanding
is not because my mother believe in Jewsuis Christ that i will concluded moronically
”well, it’s relative”
just in your assp
justify the countless moronic fails of the bitch ”humanity” is to the coward…
contemporary anglo-american “philosophy” is like a cargo cult.
it attempts to imitate natural science and thus excuse itself.
but it’s in-excus-able.
all philosophy departments should be shut down.
MIT has done this by including “philosophy” with linguistics. noam chmosky’s department.
……
1. there are only a few genuine philosophers.
2. and there have to be only a few.
3. a philosopher, properly so-called, is someone who has the effect on his reader of…”i can’t imagine ever having thought that before.”
4. philosophy should be viewed as something very unlike both science and belle lettres. it’s sui generis.
……
the only philosophers worthy of the name “philosopher” in the last 150 years are…
marx, nietzsche, heidegger…a german jew and two germans.
wittgenstein said nothing that shouldn’t be obvious to a 13 year old who reads the introduction to his dictionary…as i did.
one reason why there have been no genuine philosophers since heidegger is that the smartest people have found better things to do.
in the 19th c on the other hand many very smart people tried to be philosophers.
now they all become scientists or quants or software engineers or even lawyers.
“it attempts to imitate natural science and thus excuse itself.
but it’s in-excus-able.”
(In reference to Anglo-American philosophy)
You are absolutely, 100% correct.
HBD often contains (or attempts) to political/philosophical ideas, that are allegedly backed up by “science” although the real science comes nothing close to such ideas.
and it’s true of belle lettres too…at least in english…
1984 (1949)
The Razor’s Edge (1944)
name a great novel published after 1950…
i’ll laugh.
name a great poem after 1950…
i’ll laugh.
Modern Library‘s list of 100 best novels in english of the 20th c has On the Road at 55.
it was published in 1957.
it sucks.
it’s degenerate.
kerouac simply wasn’t that bright.
http://www.modernlibrary.com/top-100/100-best-novels/
”a philosopher, properly so-called, is someone who has the effect on his reader of…”i can’t imagine ever having thought that before.”
nope
philosopher can have none ”reader” or follower and still to be a philosopher.
there are ”geniuses” of the philosophy of course but also can exist philosophers who just follow the wisdom and starting to themselves… without creativity or philosophical insights.
if we have just a good demographics of people who ”only” follow the goddess Wisdom at least in their basic but correct levels part of this world would not be this trash.
“what’s wrong? What’s right”””
RafeReaoist pretend to be a deep thinker
Bomb a hundred people in Germany = what’s wrong or “right”?? 😉
Name calling a reader here = morality is extremely subjective
Pedophilia ??
Slavery??
any who can understand Being and Time on their first go is either smarter than me or is reading it at a much later age than i did.
i was introduced to it in college, but i finally “got it” at age 27.
Summarize what you understand
ok santa claus…in brief…
descarte said “cogito ergo sum”
heidgger said “sum ergo sum”
and regarding my comment on The Matrix…it sounds crazy at first…but that’s not what i meant.
what i meant, in part is summarized in this excellent documentary.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/simulation-hypothesis/
materialism and atheism are ultimately incoherent and absurd. although the God or gods which theists believe and atheists deny does not live on planet kolob or whatever…that is the very idea of “God” and “the gods” is basically too subtle…what does it really mean?
socrates said Be of good hope in the face of death. Believe in this one truth for certain, that no evil can befall a good man either in life or death, and that his fate is not a matter of indifference to the gods.
by “the gods” socrates wasn’t referring to anthropomorphic deities on mt olympus.
he meant the ultimate ground of existence, the sine qua non, the answer to the question, “why is there anything at all, rather than nothing?”, etc.
…descartes
sum ergo sum…
or
i am that i am
or
i am who am
this is the jews’ contribution or it’s just a greek gloss on that famous line from exodus.
that is, Dasein (the human being) is generally gefallen, in the sense that it understands itself in terms of the innerweltlich and has no appreciation for the accidental nature of this world or any world…
let alone the accidental nature of its particular world.
What he meant by his theories *
no Latin or German, please.
Latin is a dead language.
German is a doomed language, the Nazis spoke, I saw, in Schindler’s List, please.
my name is Santo-oculto, if you do not mind.
you’re name is “brazilian twink”.
…your name…
I’m not interested in what you think about me, stupid alcohol-hispanic…
I want to know what you understand about the main theory of Heidegger
aah, write in language of people
and
politely, if you can…
How old is videla now?
I’m in HS, but read through some of Introduction to Metaphysics first.
i know you’re in hs peepee.
Nah. Everybody thinks he’s you.
Everything is objective and subjective
It’s sociopath
Or
Intellectually indolent or coward to deny it
And is specially socioathic subjectify the morality.
There is a universal morality, what is inherently right or wrong
It’s difficult to understand it??
It’s difficult to accept it???
Part of universal morality is being badly applied by retarded white slaves and their masters to second intentions.
Supposedly the universal/objective morality is being applied about “rapefugee crisis” in Europe. But not. Because based on wisdom first is needed really know what is happening in middle east… Really understand…
Is universally right that there is phenotypical differences among human populations.
In the same way there is taller and shorter, albinos and pretty black skin people, smart and dumb, also there is morally right and wrong.
It’s nit because human shit around the world has been morally idiotic that no there such thing bad and good.
Again
Indolent or sociopath
Or both to deny it
Thanks for this, PP. Bernie is certainly my hero; I’m glad that he’s yours, too.
I am deeply saddened by the prospect of a Hillary or Trump presidency. One day, many years into the future, historians studying this election will look back and find themselves flabbergasted that Bernie wasn’t elected. He was just too good (morally speaking) for the political long haul, it seems.
Truthfully I still don’t know who to vote for. Although my political views are much more aligned with Hillary’s than with Trump’s, I believe that Hillary’s considerable intellect, combined with her total disregard for morality and her self-serving personality, could make her more destructive in the long-term than someone like Trump, who strikes me as somewhat of a buffoon. Because the thought of voting for Hillary sickens me, I’ll probably vote for Jill Stein; but, being an oppressed minority, I’m worried that I will regret my vote if Trump enters the White House and causes great harm to marginalized demographics.
Yeah, I don’t know. I’ll wait and see what happens within the next few months, I suppose.
All politicians never do what they say. The same would have held true for Sandberg as well.
Could You estimate Bernie’s IQ?
No higher than 115!
Why Do You think so? maybe because IQ is positively correlated with income and education, and Bernie has a relatively low net worth (for a senator) and only a degree from a not-so-relevant university where he admitted to have had poor grades?
Yes, and he was not even a late bloomer in his 40s, when he was entering politics.
Anatoly Karlin said that typical leftist juvenile agigators tend to have/score a iq around 115…
I thought Berny may score around 120
The fact that divorce and IQ are negatively correlated also supports your opinion. He divorced his first wife after two years of marriage and according to a research (I can’t find a link right now) the probability of someone with an IQ higher than 125 getting divorced in 5 years is 8%.
On the other hand we could argue that He has become incredibly influential, that He is still above average in education and income, a good health and intellectual abilities for his age, in addition to his jewish origin. All those factors would give him some extra points.
One may think that Sanders is a talented outlier, or someone lacking in ambition with an exceptional IQ. Yet he has not demonstrated any of this throughout his life. So I rate him as someone with normal intelligence.
UNLESS, you want to rate him as someone who can rigged the system to his favor, without descending into the level that got him there.
Usually, less intelligent groups like blacks and to a certain extent, Hispanics, who work the system, do not fully take advantage of it, or abuse it where they fall completely from grace.
* descended from the level…
Well, I can confidently say that my IQ is lower than Bernie’s.
Although I neither know mine nor his.
”The fact that divorce and IQ are negatively correlated also supports your opinion.”
Really, i read, i thought, that among secular jews divorce is very common…
yes, maybe there is a correlation BUT remember, is a correlation and this studies about iq and correlations seems pretty vague…
for example, we can have a 0,2 of correlation between iq and monogamy
0,2 is a lower positive correlation but still a positive correlation, still lower
how you understand it**
or this studies tend to be vague (i think yes, partially) or people on avg don’t understand what correlation really mean (yes, partially)…
Sanders IS a individual, he have, supposedly, 20% of chance to be(come) monogamic… (if i’m not doing it right, 😉 )
still a individual…
try to understand correlation such as lottery
seems you guys tend to understand correlation at literal way
if divorce and iq is positively correlated so is impossible to have divorced ”high-iq” couples OR is extremely lower the %, so divorced high-iq people only ca be outliers,
not,
if correlation is positively lower, average, even if correlation is higher
if 95% of high iq people today is vitaliciously married, so you guys will be partially right
but just look to the % of divorces today and in the past
economic security is a important factor to the divorce
[ir]religion preponderance
social acceptance
”iq” is a ONE factor
leftists are more prone to divorce than rightists
I admit that I have a bit of a bias, but I seriously doubt that his IQ is “only” 115. Having read about Bernie’s life in great detail, my estimate for his IQ is in the 125–130 range. He’s a very smart guy, just not staggeringly brilliant. His IQ broadens his appeal, if anything: voters tend to be turned off by highly intelligent politicians, and relatability greatly impacts approval ratings. 130–135 is the perfect range for a politician, as far as I’m concerned.
Sorry, I meant to write: “120–135 is the perfect range for a politician.” Anything higher alienates voters, and anything lower makes it easy for a politician to be preyed on by more intelligent individuals surreptitiously working behind the scenes.
The optimal IQ range for a politician, however, is probably 130–135. 130–135 is ideal for other careers, too—law, medicine, etc.—and, presumably, most extremely successful politicians have IQs that fall within this range.
Pumpkins already disproven the theory of an optimum IQ
@Mikey Blayze: Mind linking me to the blog entry where he refutes it? The theory makes a lot of sense to me, but I’m open-minded enough to consider that it could be wrong.
>Liz Warren
Bahahahaha
Sanders is so unrealistic, especially with his muh free college shtick.
Never mind that he’s a jew.
American politics is a farce and controlled by Jews. Trump is controlled by them as well as Hillary.
Whoever wins, the goyim lose.
Race Realist-
The Free College proposal COULD work, because having a more highly skilled populace could allow us to have more high-tech work, and shield us from factories going overseas, and the money that would have been payed in debts to the banks.
Liz Warren gave a great speech last night- at least for Alt-Lefters (Which I sympathize with), she only talked about race sofar as “if a White worker in Ohio, a Black Worker in North Carolina, and a Latino Worker in Florida are divided, and hate each other, they can’t work together for higher wages”, etc.
She’s sharp as a Whip, and although Bernie is surely bright, she can think on her feet, and not just repeat mantras like Bernie does.
The Jews surely hate her 🙂
Yes, they all hate one another. But blacks cannot get along with anyone else in any circumstance. Segregation is the only solution to AmericaStan’s mental illness of race divide.
Race Realist-
The Free College proposal COULD work, because having a more highly skilled populace could allow us to have more high-tech work, and shield us from factories going oversea(s), and the money that would have been payed in debts to the banks.
Liz Warren gave a great speech last night- at least for Alt-Lefters (Which I sympathize with), she only talked about race sofar as “if a White worker in Ohio, a Black Worker in North Carolina, and a Latino Worker in Florida are divided, and hate each other, they can’t work together for higher wages”, etc.
She’s sharp as a Whip, and although Bernie is surely bright, she can think on her feet, and not just repeat mantras like Bernie does.
The Jews surely hate her 🙂
I’m not dealer of rare books, but an advent collector.
I know of a few dealers personally, including a few women in my generation all under the age of 40, none of whom are in the Anglo Prole Sphere. Self actualization does not seem to exist there.
While others spend their money on obsolescent iPhones, and other prole items of depreciation, occasionally, I splurge on a musty rag paper.
And Kant is by far the most realistic philosopher of his age. All the French, Germans before him had a admiration for the degenerate Orientals, specifically the Chinese.
Kant realized early on that Confucianism is just a set of workplace rules requiring utmost obedience for the average man. Leibniz was a genius with calculus, but he erred on the Chinese. Kant saw the Chinese for what they are.
I read some summaries in that consist philosophical theories of Heidegger. I did not understand anything.
I think the modern philosophy did not follow the steps of the modern ” art ” ‘in which only ”the most intelligent” can see their extreme subtlety.
I saw 3 videos of the Monty Python, I did not find funny, I think it is silly. I thought it was more sophisticated, subtle, some would say, 😉
I wonder why so many legions of the ” higher iq ” people idolize them. I’ll keep watching other videos to see if I can sketch a smile, at least.
”I think the modern philosophy did not follow the steps of the modern ” art ” ‘in which only ”the most intelligent” can see their extreme subtlety.”
i think IF the modern…
Contemporary Philosophy (as opposed to Modern Philosophy of the 18th century and earlier) is a regurgitation of anything said before, with an additional layer of fluff nonsense.
Most people who idolize contemporary philosophy tend to be lower IQ and less intellectually inclined. In essence, in LoftB terms, only proles read contemporary philosophy and NYT bestsellers.
Most people who read contemporary philosophy did not read any Greek philosophy after Aristotle, or even Aristotle himself.
Forget about Medieval, which includes the Muslims, contemporary readers did not get pass the elementary school of philosophy, which is a simplistic menu of Plato’s Republic, Machiavelli’s Prince and perhaps Descartes.
”Most people who idolize contemporary philosophy tend to be lower IQ and less intellectually inclined. In essence, in LoftB terms, only proles read contemporary philosophy and NYT bestsellers.”
I don’t think so
most people who scores lower in iq tests dislike philosophy, even the works that are understandable.
most public of the modern philosophy and art tend to scores higher or at least above average in iq tests, the otherwise what you said.
philosophy/humanity students or people with cognitive level enough to entry in the university are the usual public of the modern ”art” and ”philosophy”, many them who are leftists.
Well, maybe should there many good ”philosophers” (or philosophy experts) today who are not famous and the most famous, many to most them, are irrelevant or stupid.
Individuals who read mainly Contemporary Philosophy, have an IQ of 120 or below. These are my anecdotal observations. Many of them have not read any Aristotle, beyond his Politics, because it is college required material.
Those who’ve read the Stoics, Neo-Platonists (Post-Aristotelians), basically anything after the reign of Alexander the Great and later — Smarter people are generally more intellectually curious.
Typical readers of Hegel, Foucault, Derrida, Lacan (although almost incomprehensible), Badiou, Wittgenstein and the dreaded Nietzche, are proles.
Many of them have not lay their hands on a work by Aristotle, besides college material, which is genuinely more interesting and relevant to the arts and science of any era.
Lacan’s writings are almost non-logical. No coherence, no definitive meaning, but I interpret Lacan as an Anti-American philosopher. He disliked the Anglo Proles and their Jewish masters, and he really express it through his jibberish rambling, clear and dry. I view his writings as a philosophical journey of Anti-Americanism. Americans are pushy, striving, obedient and BORING and they make a great diagnosis of his pseudoscience — these are the undertones of Lacan’s works.
good on lacan for that.
even though he was a “psycho-analyst” and thus the jew freud’s epigone.
neither derrida nor foucault were included in Fashionable Nonsense…
and with good reason.
both do make sense if you make an effort.
but still neither rise to the level of “philosopher”.
heidegger was the last philosopher worthy of the name.
Most of so-called smart people are not wise, so most of them are epicentrically stupid but there is a entire subculture to this clever sillies to pretend to be ”smarter”.
Reading Contemporary Philosophy is prole, because it attracts a demographic who are anti-intellectual, and its followers and critiques are proles.
JV is correct, Heidegger is no Hegel or Nietzche. He is esoteric, a modern day Aristotle.
JS,
what do you understand about Heidegger theories**
Aristotle, Plato, Schopenhauer, Kirkegaard, etc do not seem extremely subtle in his philosophical theories …
just thinking…
I have a tempestuous relationship with the humor, on the one hand it is very important to support the life, but there is no humor without offense …
on the other hand I’m tired against the social human modus operandi, where name-calling are or tend to be like commas in small talk.
[[[Nobody’s care]]]
I got this from leakypedia – Contemporary philosophy is the present period in the history of Western philosophy beginning at the end of the 19th century with the professionalization of the discipline and the rise of analytic and continental philosophy.
So yes I’m correct to say that Contemporary Philosophy is Post-Kantian…Industrial Revolution and the rise of the Anglo Proles, are associated with this period.
Contemporary Philosophy is prole, and prole, because it was the Anglo Proles who came to define this period, with the rise of their Jewish Prole Masters or Henchmen, either way, these 2 destructive forces have brought us to Donald Trump.
Nazism was reactionary, Heidegger was the invisible front runner to cleanse the Jewish prole out of Europe.
And Heidegger was vehemently NOT ONLY anti-semitic, but ANTI-ANGLO-PROLE. He hated the English and the American vermin, what he called the Machenschaft.
So did Jacques Lacan, his good friend!
donald j trump is the second coming of christ.
I don’t know…Trump is tied to Jewish financiers.
There is no art or beauty or creativity or progress in Anglo Prole Nations…because Anglo money and Jews are hand and glove. Jews are also orientals, asiatics, their concepts are along the line of East Asians, where materialism, despotism and moral inferiority are antithesis of European values.
yes. i was speaking hyperbolically.
obviously hitler is
die endlosung der…
anglo-juden-frage.
but trump may delay the total ruin of les etats unis merdeux by a few decades.
only a few though.
and it’s almost totally ruined already.
German Philosophy before this contemporary bunk philosophy, taken up by many degenerate Anglo Proles, predicated the evils of Brit-merica Capitalism and Culture. Kant called Anglo Proles nation destroyers while Heiddegger went on to say Anglo Proles destroy their own humanity along with the Juden.
https://rehmat1.com/2016/07/27/cynthia-mckinney-israel-behind-nice-and-munich-terror-attacks/
Some real brave black women that peepee despise…