Why liberalism is stupid

Liberalism's keynote is that making the individuum free to make his/her decisions according to his/her reason and intellect will create the best society because what is best from an individual point of view is best for society as a whole. This is a contentious statement in itself, of course, but there is a more glaring issue with liberalism: the faculty for making reasonable choices must be built up by developing the mind through education. This is called "culture" and comes from the same root as cultivation and agriculture, i.e. a deliberate and artificial modification. Culture doesn't reproduce by infesting all children who come of age, and culture involves a weeding out of bad seed: in other words, mental violence and subjugation.

In other words, liberalism can only work when there is a single dominant culture forced upon the people which sets the standard of refinement and decency. Destroying that culture, installing "multiculturalism", "pluralism", "relativism" and other supposedly more free societal forms doesn't help liberalism - it kills it.

That's why the modern "liberal" states are made up of physically repulsive (fatasses and don't exercise), mentally immature (don't even read books or understand basic science), morally defunct (cheating, lying, selfish, don't understand the concept of duty) CONSUMERS enslaved by greedy corporations to lead a life that doesn't bring them happiness (the happiest nations are in the Third World), children (Westerners are going extinct), wisdom (stupidity is their banner) nor even a healthy life (always gulping on anti-depressants and other drugs). This is like leaving your daughter in the company of literators and composers versus the company of a drug-dealing gang - both are groups of mentally free and emancipated people, but the quality of the free choices they make is not the same.

Liberalism is dying under its own weight and only the new Conservative revolution will save the West and bring freedom instead of free-dumb.

Judaic-Liberalism is death-cult mental illness bent on destroying all beauty and humanity. The only solution is to let god sort them out.

Your definition of liberalism doesn't match up with modern usage of the term.

>>3
In what way?

>>4
OP defines what is now known as "classical liberalism". The reason for making that distinction is that modern liberalism is really collectivism and no longer values the individual.

>>5
I'm OP. Why do you think modern liberalism is actually collectivism? I'm genuinely interested.

You're all making it more complex than it should be. Read this article about bumblebees: http://www.express.co.uk/news/nature/771587/bumblebees-learn-football-skills-rewards-research

have the cognitive capabilities to solve such complex tasks, but will only do so if environmental pressures are applied to necessitate such behaviours

Humans are the same. They're trying only when something pushes them to, mostly fear of death and suffering. A comfortable well-fed easy-peasy life makes people fat, stupid, lazy shits. Everything else follows from that, including a decline in education, morals, morale, health etc.

Farmer offered £2,400 for his five-legged cow by cult that worships them

>>8
That's dumb, he should ask for at least $100k if not more

‘Aliens accidentally killed me but took my corpse onto UFO to save my life' - shock claim

Catholic Church 'on alert': Pupils 'possessed by DEVIL' after playing with OUIJA BOARD APP

>>6
If it weren't the case, then there would be no need for libertarians to exist.

>>11
But libertarians compare to liberals like Nazis compare to Republicans. There always exist people with marginal views, they don't care if they "need" to exist.

>>12
Which liberals? Modern ones or Thomas Jefferson-type liberals?

>>13
You're confusing me. Could you please get back to why modern liberalism is really collectivism?

>>14
I've said all I need to say on that subject, dude, not even him.

>>5
Nope, modern liberalism still values the individual. Where it differs from classical liberalism and classical conservatism is that it recognizes that society both exists, and is not a homogeneous entity.

>>16
Eye aids

>>16
Society, like everything holy and good, is the enemy of the modern leftist as they despise all beauty and resent God. Modern liberalism lives to celebrate weakness, cruelty, lies, baby murder, and everything else that weaken society and harms the innocent. Such is the filthy, putrid nature of the leftist.

>>18
Is there not a contradiction in what you say? Does not God exist merely to allow us to celebrate our weakness? Is it not true, that the practice of prayer is a way of admitting and accepting our weakness? When we pray, we are consciously choosing to give up our independence and autonomy, place it in the hands of another. Is this not weakness? And when we encourage prayer, are we not celebrating weakness?

Traditional morals are built upon celebration of weakness. We define rules to hold ourselves back, removing free will from ourselves and transferring it to concepts which rule over us. We desire structure, because even those who are powerful, those who are on top of the power structure, consider themselves too weak to face reality for what it is.

To question morals is a sign of strength. It means we are creating our own path, no matter how difficult it may be, rather than submitting to others who control us by giving us an easy path forward. Thus any and all institutions which encourage conformity and discourage questioning are telling us to celebrate our weakness, that aspiring to strength is shameful and wrong. It takes strength to defy our authorities, and even more strength to survive on our own, without their guidance.

And this is exactly what liberals do. They see the true strength as existing in individuals, not in the artificial structures individuals submit to when they fear their own strength. And that is why you despise them, because when someone is the unquestioned owner of their own strength, you cannot control them. You see them as unnatural, because you have learned to see the true nature of humanity as something foreign. And there is a reason why the history of the world is gradually tending towards liberalism. It is because no container can last forever. Society tries to create a barrier to protect us and itself from reality, but entropy guarantees that no such barrier will stand indefinitely.

>>19

Does not God exist merely to allow us to celebrate our weakness?

Hmm. No. Why would you think that? The creation is astounding, you are here to celebrate its beauty and try to reach its potential. That means, instead of being a hedonist pedo wallowing in self-loathing, you draw attention to the beautiful and the good.

Traditional morals are built upon celebration of weakness

Wrong again. All traditions in all civilzations developed to help strengthen people and allow them to reach their full potential. The point of civilization was to keep children healthy and safe so they could develop into well-rounded adults who would seek to celebrate the beauty of creation beyond simply indulging in negativity and escapism. You concept of "power structure" is Jewish-influenced. In non-Jewy social orders the powerful are a kind of slave -- saddled with responsibility of keeping the society safe and healthy enough to have that reflect into the family units. It is a duty, just like any other.

To question morals is a sign of strength

Attacking the traditions that were developed to keep kids safe and healthy is "strength"? No, it is the act of a resentful and hateful bully. We define rules to allow our energy to be directed into constructive activities rather than burning out in a blaze of destructive glory like a worthless piece of shit.

the true nature of humanity is to create civilizations that allow for the creative energies to build on ideas and concepts through the generations. Our creative potential exists in combination and through generations. Self-absorbed arrogance and an ego-driven approach to "finding my true nature" leads to nothingness. Alone you are worthless, within a society you can reach your potential. But, of course, according to you that is somehow a celebration of weakness? I think you might have fallen for one of those memes designed to destroy you, possibly nietzsche.

>>20

All traditions in all civilzations developed to help strengthen people and allow them to reach their full potential. The point of civilization was to keep children healthy and safe so they could develop into well-rounded adults who would seek to celebrate the beauty of creation beyond simply indulging in negativity and escapism

I don't agree with the conclusions that you've put forth.

The creation is astounding, you are here to celebrate its beauty and try to reach its potential. That means, instead of being a hedonist pedo wallowing in self-loathing, you draw attention to the beautiful and the good.

So we should celebrate creation by rejecting the pleasure it brings us? The term ``hedonism" is misused these days, it doesn't mean stay up partying all night and regretting it in the morning, it meant maximizing the net enjoyment of life in a calculated way.

Wrong again. All traditions in all civilzations developed to help strengthen people and allow them to reach their full potential.

But it does not actually give people strength, it merely makes them part of a system that is strong. It's essentially collectivism.

Attacking the traditions that were developed to keep kids safe and healthy is "strength"?

Not attacking, but questioning. If you look at tradition and never ask ``is this how we should be living our life?" you are either unthinking or afraid of the unknown. You may well come to the conclusion that the answer is yes, or maybe you won't. But either means you have greater understanding now, as opposed to simply doing things because that is what is expected of you.

>>22

It's essentially collectivism

Oh really? A functional society is collectivism? How profound an observation. You just have delusions of grandeur and think you are above working together for the good of society. Some kind of pseudo-intellectualism from not playing enough sports no doubt. But guess what, kid. If everybody felt like you, you would be getting murdered and robbed and raped right now.

Liberals are so hateful and murderous while so foul and decadent, all we can do is lament for them. I pray for a day when the children are no longer persecuted by leftism.

Keep plucking that chicken !

Liberals want nothing more than to rape and murder your children. Their vile and disgustingly cruel nature means that committing the most heinous acts of unimaginable evil is par for the course. These horrendous subhumans are so so filthy and overcome with blind hatred for all that is beautiful, I fear for us all.

>>23
A functioning society is collectivism by definition. If people do not work together for one another's (society's) benefit, then that is hardly a society.

>>27
A liberal capitalist society is an example of a non-collectivist society. People interact in a civilized way but mostly don't care about society's benefit. People work together but only if it benefits each one personally.

I found this to be a fascinating article on the biological imperatives behind the liberal/conservative split.
http://neuropolitics.org/Def3.html

>>28
I wouldn't call that a society at all. Just a group of business people.

>>29

This follows the general human tendency: the greater the religiosity in a population, the higher the reproductive rates.

The future of the West is Conservative and religious. It's the only way not to become outbred by the immigrants.

>>31
It's not the only way, people like Bill Gates are working on ENTERPRISE DEPOPULATION SOLUTIONS.

>>32
Nice try, Chaim. But Bill Gates isn't even Jewish. Stop misdirecting.

Conservatives tend to be the fatasses who don't exercise not the liberals.

>>33
So? he's still working on ENTERPRISE DEPOPULATION SOLUTIONS.

>destroying that culture, installing "multiculturalism", "pluralism", "relativism" and other supposedly more free societal forms doesn't help liberalism - it kills it.
Multiculturalism doesn't really mean more cultures. Every multicultural hellhole in the world has the same culture.

The United States governing body is constructed to exist with both liberalism, those who inspire change, and conservatism, those who cling to the old ways. You cannot have change without chaos which is why you need the conservatives because they promote order while the change gradually takes over.

>>37
But that reasoning is based on a faulty premise. It is in fact because of the conservatives and their resistance to change that change leads to chaos. Chaos arises due to the resistance to change, if a society was fully in favor of change there would be no issue.

Of course, associating liberalism with change is an oversimplification, one that only makes sense because most of the West has enough forward momentum that actual societal regression is not considered a serious possibility. But in a society where the opposite is true, the conservatives would be wanting to move society backwards, while the liberals would be doing everything they can just to maintain the status quo. It's really about the relative direction of what you consider an ideal society, rather than whether change is occurring or not.

>>37
Go back to your Soros backed group leader and tell him to instruct his minimum wage internet army to stop posting.