[ Home ] [ wiz / dep / hob / lounge / jp / meta / games / music ] [ all ] [  Rules ] [  FAQ ] [  Search /  History ] [  Textboard ] [  Wiki ]

/lounge/ - Lounge

The Wizard's Lounge
Password (For file deletion.)

  [Go to bottom]   [Catalog]   [Return]   [Archive]

File: 1605973021367.jpg (91.65 KB, 1000x1000, 1:1, 1604627523929.jpg) ImgOps iqdb

 No.258107[View All]

This thread is for the civil discussion of anything towards a political nature, especially political ideology and current affairs.

Archive link of last threads

Politics Thread #5: All So Tiresome Edition 7/3/2017 - https://archive.fo/QlRs1
Politics Thread #6: World on Fire Edition 8/18/2017 - https://archive.fo/6YxvY
Politics Thread #7: Temptations Intensify Edition 8/31/17 - https://archive.fo/Y0JQu
Politics Thread #8: Left and Right Edition 10/11/17 - https://archive.fo/H0llg
Politics Thread #9: Reading Anything Online Edition 11/7/17 - https://archive.fo/yxGrJ
Politics Thread #10: The Truth Will Set You Free Edition https://archive.fo/UrurS
Politics Thread #11: someone had to make it edition - https://archive.fo/y71b2
Politics Thread #12: Fuck the pastebin edition - https://archive.fo/wD4il
Politics Thread #13: Ironic Marxist Edition - https://archive.fo/xfWZY
Politics Thread #14: Civil Discussion Edition - https://archive.fo/Ck8Xe
Politics Thread #15: Over My Dead Body Edition - https://archive.fo/xdMoH
Politics Thread #16: Missile Strikes for Peace edition - https://archive.fo/PP3tS
Politics Thread #17: Anti-Meme Edition - https://archive.fo/YxJMy
Politics Thread #18: Quote Mine Edition - https://archive.fo/mi2ZU
Politics Thread #19: Lady Justice Edition - https://archive.fo/JQeyd
Politics Thread #20: France Edition - https://archive.fo/9d9op
Politics Thread #21: Anime Political Meme Edition - https://archive.fo/K8OvE
Politics Thread #22: Verified Hate Edition -https://archive.fo/AVoyW
Politics Thread #23: Hail to the Philosopher King Edition - https://archive.fo/ooZI4
Politics Thread #24: Supreme Edition - https://archive.fo/TvRnm
Politics Thread #25: The Final Judgment Edition - https://archive.fo/0MaGf
Politics Thread #26: Non-player Character Edition - https://archive.fo/IvRUj
Politics Thread #27: Birthright Edition - https://archive.fo/Fy4ox
Politics Thread #28: Shut It Down Edition - https://archive.fo/6l87I
Politics Thread #29: Brand New Current Year Edition - https://archive.fo/pGEPL
Politics Thread #30: It's Okay To Smirk Edition - https://archive.fo/5gv13
Politics Thread #31: It Begins Edition - https://archive.fo/eaSIz
Politics Thread #32: Free Choice Edition - https://archive.fo/TTGTC
Politics Thread #33: Accelerationism edition - https://archive.fo/eFfBY
Politics Thread #34: Clown World Edition - https://archive.fo/8AYmV
Politics Thread #35: Show Some Class Edition - https://archive.fo/KzuHY
Politics Thread #36: Proper Politics Thread Edition - https://archive.fo/TuUNL
Politics Thread #37: Political Manipulation Edition - https://archive.fo/GfoQg
Politics Thread #38: Epstein's Pedophile Sting Operation Edition - https://archive.fo/qXKJi
Politics Thread #39: Straight Shooter Edition - https://archive.fo/IOPeg
Politics Thread #40: This account has been terminated Edition - https://archive.fo/TXc37
Politics Thread #41: The End Is Nigh Edition - http://archive.fo/ymZPt
Politics Thread #42: The Archive is Pointless Edition - http://archive.is/pr04j
Politics Thread #43: Primary Edition - http://archive.ph/jxL9w
Politics Thread #44: Whistleblow Editioner - http://archive.is/AErw1
Politics Thread #45: Beanie Edition - https://archive.is/KPASk
Politics Thread #46: can't flim flam the zim zam Edition - https://web.archive.org/web/20200302181051/https://wizchan.org/lounge/res/237721.html
Politics Thread #47: Pandemic Edition - http://archive.is/qHJWW
Politics Thread #48: The Great Corona Deppression, Socialism in Crisis - Rule by Thieves Edition - http://archive.is/Y7zjP
Politics Thread #49: Beginning of the Corona Rebellion Edition - http://archive.vn/mZvXk
Politics Thread #50: Dissolution of the Union Edition - http://archive.vn/mvkq4
Politics Thread #51 - http://web.archive.org/web/20200904182017/https://wizchan.org/lounge/res/246533.html
Politics Thread #52: Stand Your Ground Edition - https://archive.is/RG9R3
Politics Thread #53: Actual Non-Troll Edition - https://archive.is/0jpyR
Politics Thread #54: Summer BBQ Edition - https://archive.is/EGI5q
Politics Thread #55: Neutral Pic Edition - >>251232
Politics Thread #56: Learning From History Edition - >>252237
Politics Thread #57: Esoteric Ideology Edition - >>253367
Politics Thread #58: RC Cola Edition - >>255978
Politics Thread #59: Worshipping the Frog God Edition - >>256912
269 posts and 31 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


Go back to shitchan with your shitty dead memes


Think about how horrible it would be to be a zoomer growing up in all of this. High school must be unbearable for these people. Forced masks, holocaust classes, probably 10x as much 'diversity' as a decade ago. I don't think I could handle it, if they tried to force me into something like that I'd drop out immediately. Or just straight-up refuse to go to class if that was impossible.


My zoomer cousin dropped out because anxiety but he said he was getting taught to hate gimself for being white.
Note I am not a polfag I hate all extreme politics


damn you sound like a mega norm. Imagine not having to actually go to class in order to pass. It would be glorious.


a few years ago I walked around outside all my old publik skools at night and looked in the windows, there are spy cameras in every single hallway, stairway and classroom, that's on top of the armed cops I know for a fact they have lurking around in the places during school hours

then there's the what…500x more thuggish non-whites attending than there were when I was a kid
it must be a fucking nightmare to be white in the propaganda camps these days, I would kill myself


Us Trump nerds are a special breed. Lib cucks see my anime and video game tattoos and wanna talk nerd weeaboo shit in california. The shock on their face when I tell them I had no choice but for these to be my interests "cause mentally ill trannies and SJWs have infected every other form of nerd entertainment" and that "anime + japanese video game companies are the last bastion of true to their core nerd companies around" is priceless. I love talking about how I want my succubi to be sexualized in those mediums so I can get an escape from seeing all the blue haired couch bison shrieking all day in commiefornia.

Either they too are based and the conversation goes well, or they are the filth infecting and trying to destroy my hobbies and I can tell them fuck off cause anime and japanese video games/culture is MAGA country.


File: 1606956675437.jpg (382.05 KB, 1024x938, 512:469, Ega0rwzWoAEic7D.jpg) ImgOps iqdb

I don't know if this is true. IIRC there have been other claims like this in the past. Supposedly previous French leaders like Hollande have made comments in private that they're worried about demographics and civil war.
Is Macron privately concerned about the ‘Great Replacement’?
French author and journalist Marc Endeweld, in a recent interview about his book "The Great Manipulator: Investigation of Macron's Secret Networks", said that French President Emmanuel Macron is “obsessed with what he himself calls the Great Replacement”.

During his interview with the online news portal QG – Free Media, Endeweld claims that while Macron goes to great lengths to cultivate the public image of a moderate-centrist, in private he thinks more like someone who belongs to the radical right.

The journalist said Macron frequently expresses ideas in private borrowed from French thinkers like Eric Zemmour and Renaud Camus. Zemmour, seen as one of the most influential conservatives in France, is known for his opposition to immigration. He said, for example, on CNews in September that “immigration changes the makeup of a people. It is a crime against the European peoples, it will end in bloodshed."

Camus, a prolific right-wing writer and novelist, is perhaps best known for coining the phrase “The Great Replacement”, which refers broadly to the colonization of Western Europe by immigrants from the Middle East and Africa.

“Emmanuel Macron actually thinks like a significant portion of the reactionary right,” Endeweld says. “Secularism is a screen to be a fight against Islam and to protect the Christian identity of France. He considers that France remains predominantly Christian. He really thinks so.”


French (largely) international news site suggests that Macron is rebranding himself as a right wing "law-and-order" guy
I think it was somewhere in here that I read it https://www.voltairenet.org/en


Macron is trying to keep the pressure cooker from bursting. The yellow vests and other populist movements are raging through Europe, and he needs to find a way to save himself and his party for the re-election. Right now they're engineering what I believe(although I don't have proof) is a completely fake resurgence in islamic terror so that he can gain some of the right-wing votes in 2022.
It's extremely unlikely to be a mere coincidence that when people who tend to be right-wing start forming groups and protesting that an old "enemy" appears from nowhere and the president and party that was always so supportive of that "enemy" are now hard-lining against it. It's also very strange that this is happening just as they're trying to pass the Securite Globale garbage. And that covid lockdowns began after the Yellow-vests started gaining popular support
Exactly what was mentioned in the last thread.


Tom Sunic, a Croat-American conservative intellectual, served as a diplomat for several years in Brussels. I recall him mentioning that behind closed doors a lot of them complain about immigration and multiculturalism. But in public they pretend everything's fine.


If the accelerationism, purposeful extremist leftism pushing, public support for critical race theory, importing muslims, etc is all just 4d chess by old white men to kill liberalism I'm going eat a sandwich made with sheepsbrain and fish eyeballs.


File: 1606968410970.jpg (74.54 KB, 533x680, 533:680, EoBhN9mXEAADLun.jpg) ImgOps iqdb

Christopher Michael Langan (born March 25, 1952) is an American horse rancher and autodidact who has been reported to score very highly on IQ tests.[1] Langan's IQ was estimated on ABC's 20/20 to be between 195 and 210,[2] and he has been described by some journalists as "the smartest man in America" or "in the world".[3][4][5][6]


Hey, that sounds like a lot of geniuses. Bobby Fischer comes to mind as an example.
Nah, I guess they just lost their minds. There's no merit to their beliefs at all whatsoever. Not a single piece of their ideology is based on fact, each of them just went insane in the same way on the same general topics.


Accelerationism is delusional, wishful thinking. People who believe this theory correctly realize that the left controls the culture, that the left always wins on cultural issues long term, that each generation is culturally more left than the previous, and that changing demographics due to immigration and the difference in birth rates will eventually make it impossible for any right wing parties to win ever again in most western countries. They also correctly realize that this won't be sustainable and that shit will end up hitting the fan. Where they're completely delusional is where they think that things will completely collapse but then magically get better, and conveniently within their lifetime. It's no different from the people who cling to the hope of an afterlife to cope with death or having a shitty life.

The most likely scenario is that western countries will continue a drift into the third world, and will just remain there indefinitely.

While I do believe that rich old boomers fan the flames when it comes to shit like critical race theory, feminism, intersectionality etc I don't think their motive is to "kill liberalism". Their motive is to keep the masses divided as much as possible so that they can't unite against them. The masses can't unite against the elites when they believe that large chunks of the masses are their oppressors nor can the unite when identity politics makes them primarily fight for the interests of whichever group is their primary identity (trans, succubi, LGBTQIAAFDJHIASD++, black, hispanic etc). Instead, every group is just fighting for their own slice of the pie, with the exception of guilt ridden white male liberals who also won't fight against the elites because they're too busy kneeling for BLM and being male feminist allies.


Ah yes, the product of globalism.


When there is a train racing towards something you want to save you never try to accelerate it. At this rate it's obvious that western culture will be destroyed by globalism but something could change that. Accelerating it isn't going to throw things out of balance, it's just going to kill it faster.


I strongly suspect that a big portion of the people who push accelerationism don't sincerely have any strong beliefs or values and really just want to watch the world burn in their lifetime due to their own personal issues they haven't worked out that they externalized.


File: 1607008650881-0.mp4 (11.62 MB, 480x360, 4:3, ok1.mp4) ImgOps iqdb

File: 1607008650881-1.mp4 (6.87 MB, 480x360, 4:3, ok2.mp4) ImgOps iqdb

Literary justice, Battlefield Earth, classics, delusional pedagogy, library neutrality


File: 1607021531549.mp4 (7.64 MB, 1280x720, 16:9, p5bv8O90e9MI4LVN.mp4) ImgOps iqdb



do zoomers actually believe this?


File: 1607022767848.jpg (3.87 KB, 161x63, 23:9, hqdefault (2).jpg) ImgOps iqdb

>its pozzed?
>yes, the pozzing is complete
>broadcast it


>But something could change that
And you dare to call accelerationism delusional and magical? You are basically saying that you are simply hoping for magical fairy tale miracle to happen. On the other hand accerationism has a clear focus, to collapse everything in order to rebuild. Things and economies can be rebuild, but population interbreeding and replacement cannot be fixed.


> but population interbreeding and replacement cannot be fixed.
They certainly can.


Well are you going to explain or add some actual point to the conversation besides "no lmao"?


I would say no, but then I realized all the zoomers I actually know are homeschooled or misanthropes.


I guess I made the cuttoff for not being a zoomer. Wokeness was only just starting as I ended school


Joe accidentally blurts out that he's going to "develop some disease and say I have to resign" if he and Kamala disagrees. Notice Kamala's reaction.
On a side note he seems to be stuttering even more now.


This has to be intentional. The demiurge is just goofing off nao



Doesn't make much sense. If he's so concerned why is he allowing the entrenchment of unwhites in France? Why is he permitting the transfer of unwhites through French territory to the rest of EU and UK? Why does he chose to always be best friends with the Germans who ceaselessly work to subvert and colonize the eastern EU economically, culturally and politically as illustrated by their hysteric globohomo soft-war against Poland and Hungary?


Amazing how fast things are accelerating, right? I'm 30 but I remember people calling me crazy when I talked about how stuff like that was going to be normalized.


The greatest trick in the modern age is the idea that one can apply logical fallacies to real world phenomena in a complex way.


I realized this sounds pretty nonsensical so I'll explain further.
Logical fallacies don't really apply in a practical sense because we don't actually have perfect knowledge of the variables involved in a given system. In fact, logical fallacies were never intended to be applied in a "real world" context because they don't make sense except in the domain of things which we have only theoretical knowledge of.
In the case of the slippery slope as >>259167 said, in logic the idea is that two separate variables, no matter how closely related, do not necessarily entail one another. This if A becomes true, it doesn't necessarily mean B becomes true, even if they're related in some way. It's very easy to horribly apply this to real life: Let's say that there is a country in which bestiality is illegal and marriage with animals is illegal. If that country were to legalize animal/human marriage, there's nothing that logically entails there's a higher probability of bestiality becoming legal. Why would there be? They're two entirely different variables that do not logically interact. (A = true) will not make (b = true). However, in the real world anyone who trusts their instinct will realize these two things are connected in complex ways and it's rational to believe that if people become lenient towards romance with animals that the two also closely linked(but not a logically entailed) ideas of sexual interaction and romantic interaction will influence the country in the direction of also legalizing bestiality.
It's important to know that it's "illogical" to believe that one will lead to the other, because it doesn't necessarily. However, applying rigorous logic to situations as complex as societies is just damn retarded. There are many other examples of how logical fallacies and logical rules do not apply in the real world. For example, saying the sun will rise tomorrow is illogical. How does one know? How does one know it will even still exist? There's nothing stopping a stray black hole from enveloping it. Your belief that the sun will rise is based on inductive reasoning and doesn't have a logical foundation. All sorts of fallacies aren't really applicable to the real world but nevertheless redditors and norps use them because if they didn't cognitive dissonance would destroy their world view.


Reason applies just as well to real life as they do to hypotheticals.
As such, any conclusion that some one comes to, or argument someone makes, that is based on something irrational or illogical is almost certainly wrong.


Reason. But applying the kind of rigorous logic used in mathematics to real life is not only pointless, but stupid. The real world is not a system that human minds can logically comprehend and thus model. Nearly every decision a person, government, or other organization makes is certainly not logical, but rational. It's rational to believe that if you, say, raise prices on a certain product that there will be few sales. It's rational to believe that if you hit someone they will be upset. But these aren't logical conclusions at all, they're based on induction, heuristic, or just plan old guess. There is not logical rule that if you hit someone they will be upset, and to say that hitting someone will make them upset isn't logical, it's just reasonable and likely rational.
The problem is that redditors like you use logical fallacies as if they can be translated from mathematics to real life on a one to one basis. For example, the slippery slope is an example of something that isn't logical but obviously rational. Norps 100 years ago were arguing that negro men would start marrying white succubi if laws weren't passed to deal with them, and I'm sure if redditors existed then they'd be saying "Yeah, um, akshualy that's a logical fallacy. Just letting black people run for goverment positions won't lead to like miscgenation, it's called the slippery slope fallacy". I'm sure boomers were soothing themselves that negro men wouldn't ever be president during the 60's.
There is no logical basis at all that permitting X will lead to a permission of Y. Still, refusing to believe it will happen is more logical but less rational. You cannot make a logical decision in a given system unless you know all the variables that will be in play in that given system.


>any conclusion that some one comes to, or argument someone makes, that is based on something irrational or illogical is almost certainly wrong.
Sorry but this is a fallacy. A conclusion that comes from a faulty premise is not necessarily wrong nor is it "almost certainly wrong".
>Faulty premise: Fat people have more air particles than thin people
>Air particles increase buoyancy
>Not false conclusion: Fat people float better than thin people.
And not wrong decisions can come from this.
Faulty premise does not lead to false conclusion.


It's the chinese coof. It is nerve damage but you won't die, the only people who die from it are those who'd be killed by their next random cold anyway. Vitamin B helped me get some smell and taste back but it's been so long already I doubt I'm ever getting it back 100%.



Disturbing election night footage has emerged showing poll workers waiting for observers and news outlets to leave State Farm Arena in Atlanta after calling an end to counting for the night, before pulling out numerous large suitcases containing ballots from under a table.


>Face it, the entirety of the internet has been normified. There is nowhere to run and nowhere to hide.
This website and the late hikkichan were two good places to communicate with social outcasts


File: 1607273960687.png (398.64 KB, 450x720, 5:8, renge.png) ImgOps iqdb

You could summarize this more succinctly by saying logic can only tell us whether the form of an argument is true or false. Logic doesn't have anything to say about factual claims or semantics.

Consider the argument:
>the sun rises and falls in the sky
>things that rise and fall orbit what they rise and fall around
>therefore, the sun orbits the earth

The form of the argument is logically valid, despite being unsound. This doesn't mean the person who made the argument has poor reasoning. We could criticize them for not knowing the earth orbits the sun, but only if they could have been expected to know it.


>A conclusion that comes from a faulty premise is not necessarily wrong nor is it "almost certainly wrong".
>Faulty premise does not lead to false conclusion.
What we can say is:
- If the premises are true, then the conclusion will be true.
- It's impossible for the premises to be true, but the conclusion to be false.
- It's impossible for the premises to be true without the conclusion being true.

We can imagine cases where false premises lead to correct conclusions, or the inverse, but these arguments don't have the property of preserving truth from their premises to conclusion. Therefore, we cannot say the conclusion of these arguments is logically consequent: that it what makes a logical argument "good" or not.


I hate zoomers, they harsh my vibe.
Can't imagine how much shittier the world's gonna be when these freaks get into public offices.
I'd almost wanna stay with the neo-liberal Boomer Reich than put up with that.


I hate them too. You could at least refrain from using their lingo.


>logic can only tell us whether the form of an argument is true or false. Logic doesn't have anything to say about factual claims or semantics.
You're exactly correct wizbro.


t. schizo or dumb


File: 1607370954575.jpg (125 KB, 637x476, 91:68, truth.jpg) ImgOps iqdb

I'm just paraphrasing Smith's book on logic. I remember he wrote on the domain of logic clearly, but I had to reread it.




Even if you define away the concept of 'you' using postmodernist tricks something still must be doing the thinking, regardless of what you call it.

[View All]
[Go to top] [Catalog] [Return][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ Home ] [ wiz / dep / hob / lounge / jp / meta / games / music ] [ all ] [  Rules ] [  FAQ ] [  Search /  History ] [  Textboard ] [  Wiki ]