if you remove leftists' irrational beliefs about the equality of all races, genders, and sexual orientations (and policing those beliefs using tactics of social shaming and ostracism), then you will inevitably end up with a society governed by rightists' irrational beliefs about inferiority of races, genders, and sexual orientations (and enforcing these views using violence, bigotry, and subjugation).

there is no in between here. the average individual is a rabid bootlicking imbecile and he or she will always be ruled by a set of simplistic, totalizing beliefs whether it comes from right or left. history is clear on this. i would rather live in a lunatic leftist society than a lunatic rightist one.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4579190&forum_id=2#40567420)

Of course, the left considers that (and everything to the right of their cutting edge, for that matter) to be rightism.

Moreover, it's the left that's getting mired in nuance, albeit idiotic nuance. If you're constantly redefining racism so that none of your tribalistic bigotry is ever racist, then you're the one with the problem.

The right isn't the side that's constantly theorizing and retheorizing everything. The (American mainstream) Right affirms liberty and property -- basic, seemingly nonnegotiable ideals, and the Left is always carving out exceptions, loopholes, and pseudointellectual rebuttals. This works both ways, brother.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4579190&forum_id=2#40567468)

the alt-right and its ilk seem appealing today, but that's only because they've been beaten back and cowering in a corner. we are only a few generations removed from jim crow laws, a full-blown KKK, and lynchings - in either direction in time. the left has a certain rational basis for seeing in someone as innocuous as that bumbling idiot Trump, the spectre of Hitler.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4579190&forum_id=2#40567647)

the basis for thinking of Trump as the next Hitler is because he appealed to white people (without ever saying "white people" of course)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4579190&forum_id=2#40567661)

until leftists begin raising hispanics to the elevated status of BLM, while also consolidating all their other groups under the same tent, they pose little physical threat.

that's also why reverting to a white-dominated racist society is so dangerous, even though we are currently far away from it.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4579190&forum_id=2#40569886)

as for the left having an inherent disposition towards nuance: not true. when the right was ascendant, there were entire intellectual fields devoted to explaining the inferiority of the Negro (phrenology) or Jews (Nazi science) or women (theology). but what the average person in those days perceived was simple and uniform: "Negro subhuman, Jew subhuman, women sub-male". likewise today, you have academics debating the nuances of racism, but it all boils down to a simple message in the minds of the average person: blacks (and whatever other minorities) are sacrosanct and beyond reproach.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4579190&forum_id=2#40567577)

Just scroll twitter to see the mental gymnastics the left needs to play just to decide what's "problematic" and what isn't.

The mere facts that the left is constantly eating its own, new coalitions form as quickly as others crumble, and no one on either side knows how they're supposed to comport themselves from one week to the next suggest that the left is NOT offering some idiot-proof set of principles for the masses to live by for the sake of peace and equanimity

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4579190&forum_id=2#40567637)

so what do you propose then, supposing the "Left of 30 years ago" is not a viable long-term plan.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4579190&forum_id=2#40567670)

most xo poasters are part of the intelligentsia and would have been murdered on multiple grounds under a leftist pol pot regime

a lot of xo poasters would also be murdered in a right wing regime but a few would probably be saved by their n-threading

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4579190&forum_id=2#40567477)

leftists want to pick winners, but the winners they have chosen so far have been 1) blacks, 2) trannies and gays, and 3) women, all of whom are naturally weak or low in numbers, so giving them special status in society doesn't have much effect.

on the other hand, the alternative rightist society would pick winners by majority rule, which would have enormous consequences obviously.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4579190&forum_id=2#40569900)

women plus blacks alone will constitute a huge majority of the population dumbass. almost 63%. then throw in gays, muslims etc and we are hitting close to 70%. are u fucking dumb or did u fail middle school math?

its still oppression by a majority. just that its a blatant power grab by ppl who can't achieve or build things on their own

america has always evolved towards equality. going for the far left SJW racially divisive blatant anti-white nonsense is going back to the dark ages of jim crow

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4579190&forum_id=2#40569943)

blacks are useless, but would rather have them as deadweight diversity hires than have them getting lynched by the KKK

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4579190&forum_id=2#40569965)

and finally far left will also heavily oppress people based on religion, race etc. just look at poland, soviets (ukraine), present day china (uighurs) etc

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4579190&forum_id=2#40569898)

I understand and wish to continue.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4579190&forum_id=2#40573361)