Complaints

[§Transcix]

If you aren't messing with me, then you're so fucking messed up in your head it's not even funny. No that's not a baseless insult, it pertains to the hilarious words you just wrote.

Now I'm confused. Is this for me or crow?

FOR YOU.

[Conservationist]

Excellent. I consider it grade-A confusing.

[Everdarkgreen]

It may or may not be just me who notices that this forum suffers from something called "diversity". It's a given that some diversity is acceptable (after all, we're not neurotic drones), but I think we all need a refresher on the core ideas common to us all and the specific changes we want to see. That and perhaps a restatement of the purpose of the forum itself, which is inducing highly superfluous and juvenile conduct as of late. Worthless comments can get ignored as an example, urging the poster to want to contribute in an adequate manner in the subsequent time of asking. Instead, arguments are being fought out over the nature of arguments. It's metadurp. The reason this forum ever appealed to me in particular was because feelings were secondary to the content and this was enforced/desired group etiquette.

Ie. Is ANUS for nihilists anymore?

[crow]

What seems to have happened here is common to almost all forums.
It went to seed.
Currently, certain members/admins are attempting to weed the garden and restore order.
Gardening can be a messy business.
Hopefully it will look glorious, come summer.

[Humanicide]

Ie. Is ANUS for nihilists anymore?

No. I don't think so. At least the forum isn't. It's mostly for traditionalist conservatives and New Right type ideas. These ideas are usually agreeable to me, but I miss when users on this forum were as critical of the right as they were of the left.

[lost_wanderer]

I just hope that after the gardening, the result won't be a monoculture of transgenic potatoes.

[crow]

Look at it as good intentions, lots of love, a firm hand, and a passing cyclone.
It turns out fine, given time.

[analrapist]

Ie. Is ANUS for nihilists anymore?

No. I don't think so. At least the forum isn't. It's mostly for traditionalist conservatives and New Right type ideas. These ideas are usually agreeable to me, but I miss when users on this forum were as critical of the right as they were of the left.

I don't see any other realists out there. Not on the left at least.

[Phenoptosis]

Ie. Is ANUS for nihilists anymore?

Pure nihilists don't live long.

I think most people here understand that nihilism is just a tool for purging conditioned ideas and values. Traditionalism is what's left after everything else has been scraped away.

[sans maitre]

well first off I have an intellectually disabled son and if anyone came around my home with the intent of causing harm, I would feed them their own intestines

secondly, for supposed traditionalists you parroting a view that was developed in the early 20th century

150 years ago every village  tolerated their local idiots.  it was only in the late 1800s as society became industrialized and a pseudo-scientific view of heredity came into vogue that somehow those with mental disabilities became a menace and burden to society.  Before that they were generally cared for by their families.   And its been done here before anyway, American medical institutions were euthanizing mentally disabled children long before the Nazis and the American Eugenics movement of the 20s inspired much of Nazi policy of the 30s. 

Only an idiot or a nazi would think that genetics is that simple that people fall into good or bad stock.  There is a link between genius and autism, for example, just as there is between genius and other mental disorders. 

Anyone who has actually spent time with someone with one of these disabilities can see a purer, more transgressive humanity  - this is the real "threat" to those worthless fucks who would want to murder children

[Conservationist]

I have an intellectually disabled son and if anyone came around my home with the intent of causing harm, I would feed them their own intestines

Internet tough guy. If you and your tard wanted to live near me, I'd run you both out with a shotgun for being parasites.

secondly, for supposed traditionalists you parroting a view that was developed in the early 20th century

No. Societies have killed defectives for a long time. Even executing murders fits into this category.

Anyone who has actually spent time with someone with one of these disabilities can see a purer, more transgressive humanity

Did I just accidentally tune in to the justification channel?

[sans maitre]

No. Societies have killed defectives for a long time

then lets start by killing defectives that are OK with murdering children

[Queequeg]

I'll only go so far as to cite the pagan practices that were prevalent throughout the Norse people;

"Putting the child on the knee of the father confirmed his or her status as a member of the clan and bestowed the rights connected to this status. The child could no longer be killed, or exposed by the parents, without its being considered murder. Exposing children was a socially accepted way of limiting the population. The belief that deities were present during childbirth suggests that people did not regard the woman and the child as excluded from normal society as was the case in later, Christian, times and apparently there were no ideas about female biological functions being unclean."

"In his book Germania, Tacitus wrote that the ancient Germanic tribes enforced a similar prohibition. He found such mores remarkable and commented: "[The Germani] hold it shameful to kill any unwanted child." Modern scholarship differs. John Boswell believed that in ancient Germanic tribes unwanted children were exposed, usually in the forest. "It was the custom of the [Teutonic] pagans, that if they wanted to kill a son or daughter, they would be killed before they had been given any food." Usually children born out of wedlock were disposed that way."

All life is not sacred, even one of the biggest modern proponents of the sacredness of life (the Dalai Lama) doesn't believe it as you seem to assume.

http://youtu.be/W083nSzx1Rc

[Queequeg]

You can revere life and still understand that you need to pick weeds to make room for your food to grow. It's very basic mathematics, you have enough w to grow x of y, if you let too much of z utilize your w than you will not have enough w to sustain any y.

y = w-z/x

[Iron]

I have an intellectually disabled son and if anyone came around my home with the intent of causing harm, I would feed them their own intestines

Internet tough guy. If you and your tard wanted to live near me, I'd run you both out with a shotgun for being parasites.

secondly, for supposed traditionalists you parroting a view that was developed in the early 20th century

No. Societies have killed defectives for a long time. Even executing murders fits into this category.

Anyone who has actually spent time with someone with one of these disabilities can see a purer, more transgressive humanity

Did I just accidentally tune in to the justification channel?

Actually, this guy very likely would literally kill you in order to protect his kid. Like most people would. There's nothing internet tough-guy about it. A lot of people would sooner die than allow you to carry out your campaign of tard slaying. The number of people willing to kill and die to defend their sub-120 friends or relatives is almost certainly higher than the number of people who are willing to kill and die for the distant (and highly questionable) abstraction of your 'better society without the dumbs'. You can't just pretend this away.

Also - this whole notion that 'when things get hard enough' the idea of massacring adults with IQs below 120 will suddenly become a realistic plan in the minds of all those people out there who are currently Obama-voting liberals or conservative Christians is totally ridiculous. It's the same thing that radical utopian idealists have always been claiming about their movements: the Marxists insist that one day the proletariat will develop an internationalist class consciousness, the white nationalists insist that one day white people will wake up and stop reproducing with non-whites, etc, etc, etc. It's always somewhere on the horizon, right over the hill in the next decade. These kind of people never realize that: 1.) few are convinced about their assessment of 'the problem' and their prescribed cures, which are typically crude, simplistic, apocalyptic and absolute; 2.) human communities and individuals have a great capacity for adapting to strenuous situations, and will often face physical hardship and sometimes even the threat of annihilation rather than sacrifice their value systems and worldviews.

Nobody is going to get in line to kill half of the people they know. It is a self-indulgent fantasy, and the continuing attachment that people on this site have to this idea is hard to understand when there are more realistic ways to address the same problems. These include: legislated limitations on childbirth based upon various criteria, sterilization of criminals and sociopaths, universal and easy access to abortion, finding a way to mandate the use of birth control, etc, etc.

P.S: on a personal level - which DOES matter for 'leaders' - your inability to articulate yourself or address criticisms without resorting to passive aggression and snideness is a real failing. You realize it just looks like impotent bitterness to everyone else, right? You're not going to get very far in your social revolution acting like this.