• 1 year - 47 posts - Latest - RSS
• OP: 18 Goods vs 3 No Goods
• Thread: 75 Goods vs 30 No Goods

1. Sociologist
   75a9
   

   You a rube.

   You said you provided a "textbook definition" of ressentiment. I responded with Nietzsche's actual words on the subject which you apparently never read.

   People of ressentiment take strong/noble people, dye them another color/tell lies about them, and call them "evil." Like how white people invented the terms "white" and "black."
   When/how do you believe white people invented the terms white and black, and how does that in any way plausibly relate to Nietzsche's concept of ressentiment?
   Nietzsche strongly supported slavery as an institution by which the few benefited from the many.
   Nietzsche viewed black Africans as an inferior race who were enslaved and conquered. He didn't live to see them take up ideologies of explicit ressentiment like CRT that we see now.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !

2. Sociologist
   3998
   

   It's not that you won't explain. It's that you can't. You're scared to put things in your own words or pull out a smaller quote because as soon as you do, it'll prove, or be used to prove, that you don't know what you're talking about.
   You white nationalists get a lot of things messed up about Nietzsche.

   Like what exactly?
   What do you disagree with about the quotations provided? And why do you need a "smaller quote" to understand a complex subject?

   Let me break it down for you in terms that meet your reading level.
   Not liking chocolate ice cream doesn't automatically mean that you like vanilla ice cream. One more time for the slow people such as yourself. "Nietzsche didn't like people of color. But, he also hated white nationalists."

   Nietzsche's racial politics would be most parallel to what we would call white nationalism today. He certainly advocated that non-white people should not enjoy equal rights as white people. What do you think Nietzsche's disagreement with "white nationalism" was?

   If Nietzsche were alive today, he would be regarded as alt-right. For decades, there was an attempt by academics to paint Nietzsche as some sort of misunderstood peacenik liberal, but more recently academics have been more forthcoming that Nietzsche was a hyper-racist who backed slavery and colonialism.

   What specific element of what you believe is "white nationalism" do you think Nietzsche disagreed with, or in what way were his political views (if we can describe them as such) opposed to a white nationalist project?

   1 year ago # QUOTE 1 GOOD 0 NO GOOD !

3. Sociologist
   3998
   

   And, since you're super-slow, I'll also repeat this:
   "The white nationalists of today make arguments that are virtually the same as the anti-Semites of Nietzsche's era. And, Nietzsche hated those anti-Semites BECAUSE OF THEIR RESSENTIMENT."

   And I just provided you with quotations by Nietzsche that would be regarded as extremely anti-semitic by I think everyone alive today.
   Nietzsche opposed the "anti-semites" of his day because they were Christians and German nationalists.

   Everything you've written proves that he was right about white nationalism.

   Again, Nietzsche's racial views are parallel to white nationalism.
   Your claim that Nietzsche "opposed white nationalism" is overtly false because: 1. no one was called a "white nationalist" in the late 1800s; 2. Nietzsche was an extreme pro-white racist and expressed interest in a hierarchical racial caste system like ancient India.

   Saying "Nietzsche opposed white nationalism" makes as much sense as saying "Nietzsche opposed critical race theory." Critical race theory did not yet exist when Nietzsche was writing. You seem completely incapable of processing that 20th century political movements were not discussed by Nietzsche. You seem to have a difficult time understanding how the basic concept of passage of time in history works?

   1 year ago # QUOTE 1 GOOD 0 NO GOOD !

4. Sociologist
   3998
   

   Nietzsche exalted Napoleon, a proto-f/ascist dictator who reimposed slavery against blacks after a previous government had abolished slavery, and who was the first national leader to use gas chambers for mass executions against Haitian rebels.

   Are you trying to argue there is a difference between "white nationalism" and "white supremacism" (which is sometimes argued)? This is sometimes taken to mean that white nationalists don't want to rule over anyone and just want their race to be allowed to exist and be left alone, while white supremacists want their race to dominate and exploit inferior races. From *that* categorical differentiation, we can argue Nietzsche was an extreme white supremacist who would have opposed white nationalists.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 GOOD 0 NO GOOD !

5. Sociologist
   3998
   

   Note: There is no documented usage of the term "white nationalist" or "white nationalism" before 1925. So your statements that Nietzsche "opposed white nationalists" are demonstrably false.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 1 GOOD 0 NO GOOD !

6. Sociologist
   09d1
   

   Jeez, did you even read this!!? Or, did you just do a word search for "ressentiment," then copy and paste!

   LOLLLLLLLLLLLLL!

   You're a white nationalist. You think that Nietzsche supports you.

   But, then you post this:
   "one should ask rather precisely who is "evil" in the sense of the morality of ressentiment. The answer, in all strictness, is: precisely the "good man" of the other morality, precisely the noble, powerful man, the ruler, but dyed in another color, interpreted in another fashion, seen in another way by the venomous eye of ressentiment."

   People of ressentiment take strong/noble people, dye them another color/tell lies about them, and call them "evil." Like how white people invented the terms "white" and "black."

   Is this what you did in grad school? Chopped and spliced huge chunks of text, didn't explain them, and said that they supported your point.

   I know why you got kicked out. I just can't figure out why they let you in.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !

7. Sociologist
   4268
   

   Look at the backlash you guys caused. Things that were incredibly taboo to discuss only several years ago, like anti-white bias of the US power establishment, are now considered mainstream conservatism. Mainstream conservatism no longer means Bush-Romney Wall Street militarism -- mainstream conservatism now means populist white nationalism. How do you like that?
   A decade ago you weren't allowed to complain something was "anti-white" without paradoxically being called a hatemonger for saying so. Unabashedly pro-white views stated as such or at least stated as in opposition to anti-white racism, that were regarded as fringe only a decade ago, are now the mainstream of the Republican Party. White nationalism launched a hostile takeover of the Republican Party and succeeded, and could have never done so without corporate establishment wokeism as its foil.
   Even someone like Glenn Youngkin, who only a couple years ago was CEO of Carlyle and from there directed funding toward woke causes, needed to engage in rabble rousing against anti-white racism and CRT to gain political office. White nationalists now effectively control the Republican Party and no Republican embracing anti-white politics will ever succeed again.
   CRT required everyone to focus on RACE NOT CLASS which led to young and economically disenfranchised whites to spend more time thinking about their racial identity, and seeing that as the primary category leading to their oppression. I'm not saying the backlash was intended, but it might as well have been. This could have never happened without CRT or BLM -- so hug a liberal oligarch for funding those tendencies. All they have done is awaken a sleeping giant and filled him with a ter/rible resolve.

   This is the person who felt called out in the Marxist mask thread, lol.

   2 months ago # QUOTE 0 GOOD 0 NO GOOD !

Reply