The left control morality, what do we do?

m.youtube.com/watch?v=e084mPEcnEQ
m.youtube.com/watch?v=9Sf2qQuSI2I
stillnessinthestorm.com/2020/01/how-the-2010s-changed-politics-forever/

Attached: th (4).jpg (401x225, 28.25K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/USWcJr3Vt9s
youtube.com/watch?v=LqaoSfpucaQ
archive.org/details/essaysofschopenh00schouoft/page/n521/mode/2up
archive.org/details/23341891SchopenhauerParergaAndParalipomenaV2/23341891-Schopenhauer-Parerga-and-Paralipomena-V-2/
archive.org/details/immanuelkantscr07kantgoog
youtube.com/watch?v=fM8XgRVRCks
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Who's we bitch?

Use biblical morality.

Can't argue against liberalism with liberalism because you can excuse every bad idea in it.

Right-wingers or at least anyone who doesn't subscribe to the left-wing satanic ideology.

Yes exactly, we will lose using the left's moral framework. We have to go back to traditional and biblical morality. It is best for the west to do that since western civilizations are based on Christian values. Without those values, we collapse and ancient problems arise. This moral inversion likely started happening after WW2 as a plan to stop war from happening again. Now we end up here. By the way, this is mentioned on the sequel of the second video I linked. youtu.be/USWcJr3Vt9s

It'll be difficult spreading Biblical morality to the west against seeing as mainstream conservatives are not fond of that.

>The left control morality
How can an immoral person control morality?

Attached: Kaiser.png (975x503, 209.3K)

By enforcing their own horrible standards upon others. You're right as immoral people aren't moral, Atheists can't create morals, but they can enforce immoral guidelines via political correctness. People can't be racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobia, xenophobic etc. Their guidelines are based on tolerance which means accepting different groups of people and different actions no matter how degenerate.

People have to be very tolerant and tolerate many abhorrent things. They have the paradox of intolerance and they enforce their beliefs on other people.

Their beliefs just keep getting more extreme starting from the enlightenment and they're pushing it on people to be more and more extreme with their beliefs.

>controlling morality
this is how you know the entire concept of morality is a fucking joke.

No it isn't, morality isn't a joke. Should've used another term since immoral people can't be moral. Basically, Christian morality used to be enforced in society up until after WW2. Now that the world has became secular, the left has their own guidelines to enforce on others, their own beliefs. Sort of like morals.That's what my post and those videos are about.

In summary, they are spreading immorality. But
Morality still controls them, if morality is what we think it is. That is, if not abiding by it has consequences, then they are feeling the consequences all the time.

Attached: 1659090429559763.gif (320x320, 807.69K)

>Christian morality used to be enforced in society up until after WW2.
Christian monarchies ended in WWI. National socialism was a modernist movement. Christian morality was enforced by the Catholics until the 60s, when Vatican II opened its doors to modernity. Hence, you will see many wholesome movies made in Hollywood but only until the 60s.

Venereal diseases like HIV, AIDs, Syphilis, HPV and Monkeypox is the punishment. Corruption and stress too. These people may get overthrown soon or have revenge enacted on them. Also, they will all burn in he'll most likely.

christian morality was also invented by men who needed to control people. what difference is there? the left believe themselves to be right and just, so do christians with their laws. what gives you the idea of your objective superiority?

>How the Gracchi brothers changed politics forever

Kinda, but it happened earlier anyways.

Attached: hilarious.png (650x581, 284.45K)

The ideal Man in Religion is extremely Intelligent and extremely Resilient as he has ideal, complete command over his senses.
But being resilient means that he does not require the fruits of his labour. He who Produces but does not eat much is a Slave, except not out of weakness, but sheer strength.

The ideal man in democracy is in a pursuit of his happiness. He reaches 'happiness' by the fruits of his Labour.
Until he reaches the fruits, and perhaps even after, he is miserable, wanton and in a state of negotiation, agonizing need. He who produces but needs to eat and taste much is a slave, except not out of nobleness, but sheer dependence.

To juxtapose further, a traditional society produces women who serve their husbands, as example for their sons and daughters, and as a way for keeping the next generations from plunging into decay. It produces men who likewise see themselves as servant for the unenlightened to see. Everybody all the way up to the King, who is designed to be the closest servant of Christ, craves to and is used to serve, if need be, even by martyrdom. People are not slaves to their bodily vessel. Mind and spirit are freed and reign. Hierarchies helpful to keeping society calm are desired, and carnal life is largely overcome by most through means of enlightenment.

A society of the unfree produces headless households trife with struggle that are hotbeds for degeneracy. It gives birth to abortion, and democracy ('ye shall be as gods') as people do not honour life and servitude to any hierarchy that might help them calm down collectively. For people identifying with democracy, belief in God is a strenuous effort because they are not used to obeying their father or mother, or rulers to begin with, by the design of the system. A traditional society on the other hand is a symbol for the throne of David and its structure is modelled after the Heavenly Kingdom. God and his reign are the model for rule in the earthly society. With a father ruling the home and a King ruling over society, belief in God is a reinforcement of the outside and the outside is a reinforcement of the belief in God. Belief comes easy.

I had a friend who told me he has a 'duty' to be an atheist as a scientist. I told him it is not so, but that as a trustful participant in democracy, he may have to. Christendom is not intuitive without a change in the societal and political order of the day. The times are incompatible with Religion, and the two cannot coexist. youtube.com/watch?v=LqaoSfpucaQ “For monarchy to work, one man must be wise. For democracy to work, a majority of the people must be wise. Which is more likely?”

Thank you for the correction, my point was that secular values started prevailing after WWII. This started growing after WW2. So Christian monarchies ended in WWI and Catholic morality stopped in the 60's. So that's another checkpoint for modernity. It could be said that that the decay of Christian morality happened during the enlightenment. Maybe the Protestant Reformation was the first fracture. Now, evil and ancient problems have arisen.

Convert to pessimism.

archive.org/details/essaysofschopenh00schouoft/page/n521/mode/2up

archive.org/details/23341891SchopenhauerParergaAndParalipomenaV2/23341891-Schopenhauer-Parerga-and-Paralipomena-V-2/

archive.org/details/immanuelkantscr07kantgoog

Attached: download.jpg (202x250, 4.86K)

In short, Christian morality was not "invented to control". It was written down by people with good command over their passions. Quite to the opposite, these men put themselves in positions of servitude, knowing they can guide the people better if they serve.

I blame Nietzsche for the wide-spread misconception.

Because we have God in our side, God creates morals by sending religious text from Prophets to people. Morality is objective, only God can create morals. It saddens me that a Vatnik can be so unbased.

Secular values started with Protestantism to some extend, but the americans becoming a democracy really manifested it and lead to the french revolution and total demise. After all, democracy is rebellious and hence satanic - "Thee shall be gods" is said by satan in genesis as a precursor to democratic thought.

>Now, evil and ancient problems have arisen.
Spot on, I could not have formulated it better myself. But you should not worry, our ancient solutions are more than enough. youtube.com/watch?v=fM8XgRVRCks

The archive site labels the book from the third link as anti-Christian.

in other words, "be a slave, an emotionless desireless machine, anything you might ever want is a sin, your strength is in being used by someone". I wonder if anyone would benefit if plebs were following this idea willingly, hm?
you were told you do by the same source that listed the laws you must follow. why do you believe it? why do you not believe other religions or magic or astrology or alchemy? what makes your religion special?

Attached: The Anti-Zen.webm (320x240, 1.08M)