[ 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: 1653669094670.jpg (43.83 KB, 352x352, 1:1, American.jpg) ImgOps iqdb

 No.289703[View All]


Previous thread: https://archive.ph/Rqjz4
286 posts and 33 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


I don't have a problem with word plays and rhetorics either, in fact they can't be separated from philosophy. Just curious what you think. So "sin" or "guilt" are hostile to a good life in this world but dishonor isn't? I don't think it matters what we call it when we are probably thinking about the same thing.

The western man is driven naturally to reach new heights and new depths, I think this is exactly why Western Culture colonized the world at one point. People on /pol/ and such argue that Western Culture is more civilized and pacifist but it is exactly the opposite. It is a warrior culture and about conquering and domination, that is why the West is still the leading superpower. Even though we have weak leaders now, previous western rulers managed to build up strong countries for us.

I understand what you mean. But I think a Global Unified leadership has many many possibilities for us to explore. It's like the Tower of Babel, humanity according to myth worked together and they almost dethroned God. It is interesting to think about what we could be capable of together.


I'm not arguing in favor of neoliberal states though. I think it is just better to reserve the right to own guns for those who need them for their work. I don't see the positive point for owning guns while I see many downsides.

Well there is the problem then. I don't think people are equal or that everyone should have the same rights. Some people are more responsible, honorable and cultured than others so they deserve extra rights while those who don't even know what planet they live on deserve to be slaves.

>the homosexual narrative yet again

Don't you have other 'arguments' or insults? It got boring. We get it you place incredible amounts of importance on appearing like a tough guy on the Internet thanks to your inferiority complex. Not everyone needs to prove their masculinity at every given chance, in fact mostly homosexuals do this.

As for your childish anti-authority rebel attitude, unlike you I know I am part of society and the collective and that I depend on others. If you break your leg you go see a doctor and he treats you and tells you what to do. If your TV breaks down you call someone to fix it or to look at it. Why is it any different with political leaders and persons of authority? You always serve someone or something, whether you acknowledge it or not. And if that is so, why not serve someone like Napoleon, Alexander The Great or Julius Caesar? Instead of serving unworthy people.


>Some people are more responsible, honorable and cultured than others so they deserve extra rights while those who don't even know what planet they live on deserve to be slaves.
It's rather boggling that you use success in politics as a measure of how honorable and "cultured" someone is.


But I don't? I mentioned the people I did to give an example. There were probably many other unknown people who were worthy to be leaders through history but never got the chance.

I consider myself worthy to be part of a Global Aristocracy too. It's not about merit or high IQ or power only. It is about spirit and creativity.


Okay, so if you do not actually view the current caste of politicians as worthy of enslaving everyone else then why are you lobbying to give them the power to enslave us?


>become the gf

You gotta applaud them for it right? Maybe they couldn't get a gf but in the end they gamed the system in their favor: No one can deny that they aren't "their own gfs" because it would be "bigoted".


They haven’t gamed anything but themselves.


> and things I've noticed in my tranny/trap porn collection
Not knocking you on this but it seems a little pat that so many online male political opinions have such a deep inclusion of trends within their pornographic interests. Ex., I am disgusted by cuckshit and avoided viewing or attending to all the constant media attention surrounding the "Trump Tapes," the "Steele Dossier," the Clinton Foundation, any of Giuliani's numerous scandals, the entire Royal Family, or the Depp/Heard trial partially because I get those same 'you will not be able to jack off to this' cuckshit vibes. Kinda wonder how much that sort of selection filter actually distorts the ability to perceive the actual political landscape.


File: 1654370851300.jpeg (165.73 KB, 770x1199, 70:109, FUZpG_gXEAI9ubN.jpeg) ImgOps iqdb

>"Two men kiss as they celebrate stealing 1st & 2rd place in a womens race…succubus takes care of her child as she stands on the 3rd place she has been relegated to due to male cheats.

>This pic tells the story of gender ideology perfectly.

>Men first, succubi & childrens needs last."

Comedy or a tragedy, it writes itself.


One hand, I have a HUGE supply of trap porn now, absolutely huge because of this, all of it quality. And because they are also geeky dudes who jack off to /d/, I'm almost 100% sure that super niche porn genres have expanded because of them as well. I don't know if anyone remembers how rare trap hentai comics were when losers hadn't dropped their standards to include men. And how limited certain niches of porn/hentai, like I don't know, vore or turning into an onahole.

Hell, I now have quality IRL latex kigu trap porn. That's 3, maybe 4 levels of specialization.

On the other hand, fuck no. It's a tragedy for my geek brethren. This bizarre display of failed masculinity (and not in the /pol/tard sense), this warping of societal bonds, this weird vibe of misogyny that radiates from some trannies that I can't place my finger on, making possibly "dangerous" minds docile, the continuing normalization of /d/egneracy etc. >>290245 is right, they may have "gamed" the system but ultimately they've gamed themselves, now they're /d/egenerate pawns for whatever power wants to control them.

As much I consume this porn, I don't think this shit is a kink really, it's more like failures of society appearing in porn.

>but it seems a little pat that so many online male political opinions have such a deep inclusion of trends within their pornographic interests.

>Kinda wonder how much that sort of selection filter actually distorts the ability to perceive the actual political landscape.

As in how much your porn likes filter affects your ability to perceive the actual political landscape?


I thought they claim that trans are all crabs who want to sneak in and violate cisgirls, but these proud trans dont need cisscum they got each other


I wasn't sure what word to use tbh.
It seems like there's a convenient idea that one's tastes and distastes in pornography provide insight rather than irreparably distorting it.


how did it all start? was it suggested to you or something? don't feel bad, bet if mods were to post every user's tracking cookie on here the mask would come off lol


How did what start?


ah, sorry for assuming i guess i don't remember well if it was an entire thread that this stuff was posted in

if i remember the idea was that trannies show up in speedrunning community so often because tranny/autism overlap, or there is some incentive/benefit for an autist to become trans. if you google speedrunning trans, games done quick trans, it became apparent this was a problem around 4 years ago, but i can find stuff as early as 2016 where people are complaining about tranny speedrunners being obnoxious and attention whoring. idk the reason i assume they get more views by becoming an abomination and relying on the woke/fag/trans/lgbt movement for support


what made him start collecting trap?


Speculation here, but I believe it may have made his penis hard.


I think most people would change their mind on abortion if someone showed them an actual video of how it's performed. They literally rip the baby into pieces while its in the womb and take it out bit by bit.

I was under this misconception that "oh it's just a clump of cells dude" but in reality it's basically a baby with a face, nose, ears, little arms etc. and sometimes its still alive when they "abort" it so the doctor kills it with another medical instrument. Then they don't even bury it or anything, but they actually sell it cause a lot of companies need baby fetuses for research or as active ingredients. Those memes about satanic rituals are starting to get kinda creepy…

All these succubi parading around, fighting for their "right" to kill a baby cause its an inconvenience, boasting about their tenth abortion like it's a "fuck you" to their dad or something. Whole thing makes me sick and I'm pretty liberal minded, not a religious nutcase that thinks jizzing on a napkin is baby murder.

I know most wizzies are anti-natalist and think life is inherently shit, but that still doesn't mean it's right to kill a baby. Shit is gruesome and it should be a last resort in case of a medical emergency, not a fucking "choice" for some vapid whore.


Your objection is on the grounds of aesthetics.
John Stuart Mill wrote the big book of why aesthetics should have no weight in governance.


Actually, it's on the grounds of it being a baby. Once the thing has a face, arms and legs, we ought to leave it alone.


>Actually, it's on the grounds of it being a baby.
Your concept of "baby" is itself aesthetic. The 'religious nutcase' types you deprecated in your previous post had at least arrived at their conclusions via a process of reasoning that proceeded from their assumptions and logical axioms. In your case it's just 'this thing had a nose omg.'


defecating decaying primate meat stick cult lol


>Your concept of "baby" is itself aesthetic.

No less than saying that my concept of "5" is aesthetic because I note that there five things on the table. Just because I arrive at a conclusion by observing certain phenomena, doesn't make it about aesthetics. Are you retarded?

If it looks like a baby i.e. has arms, legs, a face, ears, etc., it's a baby, no longer "just a clump of cells". At that point, it is my belief that it is immoral to stop the process unless absolutely medically necessary for the mother.

Are you telling the difference between a zygote and a baby fetus is just about aesthetic opinion? You can objectively measure the difference between those things. My horror at someone killing a baby is not about killing a thing that has a nose, but that the nose itself is an indication that the thing was not merely a clump of cells as whores and reductionist would like to believe.


wow ben shapiro word for word, text book moralfag parrot.
there is no mercy for anyone. not for the elderly, not for babies or baby animals and you want to keep this sadistic meatgrinder going? you jerk off to snuff films, you're not fooling anybody


Yeah, let's kill babies cuz they might end up losers like you.


File: 1654415772744.mp4 (5.3 MB, 640x360, 16:9, breed.mp4) ImgOps iqdb

word for word, get new material.


Not my fault Tyrone creampied your momma.


crab projects its sexual fantasy aka breeding, you live through snuff porn I called it lmao


Mixed race mutt hates it life so much it wishes death on the entire planet. Celebrates when his whore mother aborts another nigglet baby in its third trimester cuz she was too fat to notice.


crab types out its bbc mom fetish ^


O.K. wait…why would Fox News make this piece? Isn't the classic advice “never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake”? If not procreating is a bad thing, then from Fox's pov, isn't it in their best interests that their enemies not procreate?


well a baby should not be around people with anger issues like the guy that had a vulgar meltdown a few posts above lol


Eventually you get bored of the same type of porn and you move onto more and more niche genres.

>It seems like there's a convenient idea that one's tastes and distastes in pornography provide insight rather than irreparably distorting it.
It's probably both, feedback loops and such.

>games done quick trans
I know about trannies in speedrunning but there's actually a thing called "games done quick trans"?


Wimmin getting rekt by trannies hahahah.I really enjoy when radical feminists rage at trannies


I'm not lobbying for them. Guns don't make you free, only a child would believe this. With or without guns you are a slave. In fact, this is the whole purpose of letting the population have guns, to delude them into believing they are free.

If something is stupid, then it is stupid under all kind of government. If I think legalizing weed and prostitution is retarded then I won't care if I live in a democracy or in absolute monarchy or dictatorship, it is still stupid in all the cases. Same for owning guns. If something is a bad thing then it is a bad thing under all circumstances.


>If something is a bad thing then it is a bad thing under all circumstances
except when it comes to right and wrong of course. you believe youre entitled to force others to obey you under the threat of death because youre an "aristocrat" or something (delusional).


So the government being able to own guns is a bad thing too then? Along with the army being able to own guns?


Yes. Necessarily.
But the commons must be disarmed before the disarmament of the state can be pursued.
And states which are comparatively disarmed do exist under such circumstances.
Armament should be a privilege of the knightly class, or at the very most the yeoman/kulak class of lesser gentry, as it had been for millennia prior to Liberalism and Democracy devouring the old order.


>And states which are comparatively disarmed do exist under such circumstances.
They still have guns that they will use if people get too rowdy. And they outsource their national defense to countries like the US. They're still using guns.
>Armament should be a privilege of the knightly class
What happened to "If something is a bad thing then it is a bad thing under all circumstances"?


that little shit isnt even alive, my pc has a voice and i can give it a face, doesnt mean its alive..


>muh children muh china daaaaa leaaaft
US is a fucking horrible place, now I understand why everyone is mentally ill there.


your pc is not alive because it does not undergo cellular metabolism.
the fetal stage of life is undergoing cellular metabolism, as an organism, which organism is definitionally a human organism, as a distinct organism from the mother.


my pc has electrons and particles


I am certain that every university and institution of science would love to have you explain to them in detail why trees, fungi and insects are not really alive on account of your radio controlled car toy existing. I am not so certain that it is appropriate material for the politics thread.


File: 1654479678597.mp4 (7.25 MB, 640x360, 16:9, eek.mp4) ImgOps iqdb

you mean the very same ones polcrabs dismiss when those don't match their world view? hybrid robot lives matter


I'm an actual aristocrat, my bloodline proves this, my family got privileges under the Habsburgs. But blood isn't everything, I think spirit matters more. Yes, I'm a special person, I am superior to others.
Why should I acknowledge the will of the ignorant masses? They can vote for Trump or Biden or whomever they like, I don't care, that doesn't mean they are right. They have numbers on their side only, just because they are the majority doesn't mean they are necessarily right in any sense of the word.

I never argued for things like nobody should use guns, I was saying that only people whose profession requires them to use guns should be able to use them. So I never said that the army or the police shouldn't use guns. It is bad to give guns to everyone unconditionally, that was my whole point. It is a bad thing under all circumstances.

It isn't wrong to arm soldiers or the police because they have actual reasons to use guns in their work. If you are so obsessed with guns why not just be a police officer or soldier?


What criteria exactly makes you superior to everyone else to the point where it's okay for you to enslave them?


>It is bad to give guns to everyone unconditionally
you arent giving guns to anyone, are you retarded? the "aristocrat" blood sure does shine through here. people make guns, and then sell them, nowhere in this process are they given out, what youre proposing is killing or jailing anyone who sells a gun to a regular person or any regular person that has a gun. what you want to do is forcefully stop consensual transactions from happening, not "stop giving out guns".

>they have actual reasons to use guns in their work

listen here you fucking retard i have a reason to use a gun in my life, nevermind what kind of fucking job i have. im a living breathing person with a body and possessions, and every fucking day i live in the real world, with people capable of violence. i dont get to take a break, i dont get to go home, every single day i live amongst people capable of doing harm to me and so i need a gun.


Being able to form correct assumptions about the world, having visionary-tier ability to plan ahead, having natural charisma and the necessary cruelty to rule over others. Want me to go on? I could list my superior abilities all day and night.

Giving out and selling are the same, now you are just playing with words, whatever. If you legalize drugs and people buy them then it is like distributing drugs among the population. Selling drugs and prostitution are also "consensual transactions" by your definition, you think everything should be allowed? Society needs laws and regulations, without them it falls apart.

>i need a gun!!!

No, you don't. You only think you need to have a gun because you were raised to believe this nonsense by the gun lobby. It is the duty of the police to protect everyone, not yours. You aren't authorized to serve justice to anyone.
>bbb-but my right for self-defense
You are so paranoid because you live in a country where guns are piss easy to get. If people weren't going around with uzis then you wouldn't need guns either.


What kind of raging skitzo babble is this? Guns are easy to get in most of the world. Why are you so paranoid about them?


No, they aren't easy to get in most part of the world. My problem isn't with guns themselves but the people who could easily purchase them in case they were legalized. Look at the US and tell me it is okay to legalize guns.

[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 ]