fschmidt #fundie

fschmidt #fundie reddit.com

All people living in Western countries are feasting on the dead carcass of the Enlightenment. Modern culture has no more claim to the riches that were produced by the Enlightenment than Muslims do. So the Muslims have every right to plunder Western countries and to take their women.

24 comments

old comment by

@Crusader70

Starting with the Enlightenment being a move away from ignorance, tradition, and particularly religion while Schmidt often speaks as though it were the opposite I'd say look up his "Co-Alpha Brotherhood" site which wants people to believe that society at the time was a collection of low-status men (while somehow being the aristocracy at the same time) with ultra-conservative (which would resist advancements in scientific knowledge and expansive education) neoreactionary (which do not condone the idea of co-operation as your place is set in stone) views working together harmoniously (despite clannish family rivalries) that were just as obsessed with sex and manhood then as he is today (which no society was) with the roles of men and women very rigidly defined (except of course that he ignores the lack of a gender barrier to hard labour in rural farms and various women that held political power when the men of the household nearly tore themselves apart and notably that much of what we considered "women's work" today such as child-rearing and housekeeping were not stigmatized as they are by men like Schmidt and instead seen as a sign of responsibility and self-sufficiency) and that the average man had an arranged monogamous relationship (despite arranged marriages being the norm of the upper class only and monogamous meaning a singular, committed relationship which is something the rest of this sentence is going to highlight that he can't quite wrap his head around) plus a harem, (despite harems being considered the backwards practices of godless savages in the undeveloped colonies and the term mistress - a singular kept woman - being one of scorn and impropriety,) plus casual sex, (despite adulterers being publically vilified and punished harshly,) plus prostitutes, (despite prostitution being illegal,) and this was all socially acceptable. Unless you were a woman and therefore you were cheating on a man as you were supposedly married off by the age of 12, but somehow despite every woman being in an arranged marriage from childhood and the male-to-female ratio of the human race this somehow still leaves women free for fooling around when men leave the house and get bored in an hour.

But I'm sure you already know it quite well, don't you... attempted literal motherfucker? You just have a very flexible view of reality.

old comment by Crusader70

>Starting with the Enlightenment being a move away from ignorance, tradition, and particularly religion while Schmidt often speaks as though it were the opposite

You don't understand his views or Enlightenment for that matter. Founding Fathers were all products of Enlightenment but deeply religious people. Others things you claim are correct but are exactly what he is saying as well. Also, you should understand that the Enlightenment was never about the kind of 20th/21st century liberalism you believe it to be. The Enlightenment would never give the vote to women, as men of the period were educated enough to know what this would entail.

>I'd say look up his "Co-Alpha Brotherhood" site which wants people to believe that society at the time was a collection of low-status men (while somehow being the aristocracy at the same time) with ultra-conservative (which would resist advancements in scientific knowledge and expansive education) neoreactionary (which do not condone the idea of co-operation as your place is set in stone) views working together harmoniously (despite clannish family rivalries) that were just as obsessed with sex and manhood then as he is today

I am well acquainted with that site. What you describe it as has nothing to do with his views at all. He doesn't even talk about coalphas of the Enlightenment period (nor would he describe the concept the way you do).

You also make bizzare conjuctions like "neoreactionary" to describe 18th century people, and lie about fschmidt's views- short review of his posts shows he is not obsessed with sex or some "manhood".

I know that the cretins here will think your post has any sense but it's a completely misguided critique that strawmans fschmidt's views and doesn't understand Enlightenment.

old comment by Azereaux

@Crusader70

So you're saying that societies you deem worthless are therefore to be destroyed and consumed by societies you decide have merit? Who made you or the OP the arbiters of a society's worth? Considering the advances of Western Civilization, including the very Internet we're typing on, I'd hardly call the society worthless.

However, to address your argument,

X is worthless
Y is not worthless
Worthless things should be supplanted by non-worthless things.
Therefore X should replace Y.

Logically valid, but not sound*. Reality simply doesn't agree, as worth is subjective, not objective. Therefore, the argument has no basis in reality.

The OP's Stated Argument

Modern Culture has no claim to the Enlightenment and its products.
Muslims have no claim to the Enlightenment and its products.
Therefore, Muslims have every right to plunder Modern Culture countries.

This is a non-sequiter. As is the following

X is a brick
Y is a brick
Therefore X should be able to incinerate Y

Hence my saying the conclusion does not follow from the premises. You had to add premises to make this mess even remotely logically valid, and even then, adding your valid argument to their non-sequiter, you get this

Modern Culture has no claim to the Enlightenment and its products. (A>B)
Muslims have no claim to the Enlightenment and its products. (C>B)
Modern Culture is worthless because of Premise A (B>-W)
Muslim culture is not worthless despite Premise B (B>W)
Worthless things should be supplanted by non-worthless things. (-(-W)>W)
Therefore, Muslims have every right to plunder Modern Culture countries. (B>?)

As Premise A and B are identical save for one word, there is a clear logical contradiction between points C and D, leading to an invalid mess and the same flawed conclusion. Therefore, even with your logic added, the OP's argument goes from non-sequiter to merely invalid by reason of internal contradiction in addition to adding your unsound argument to the mix, meaning the result is both invalid and unsound.

Either way, this bullshit makes no sense, and your added reasoning doesn't help matters.

Hey, I paid good money for those logic courses, I'm going to frelling use it.

*As is this

X is a bird
All birds are Green
Therefore X is green

old comment by Anon-e-moose

@Screwfailure(IQ)7.0

https://voat.co/v/Incels/1328344

image

Care to actually make some arguments regarding this?

Are you intelligent enough to question what fschit said in the above post in a certain sub on Voat...?!

Quote Mining. It's a thing. A curious irony too, as GK Chesterton would have said...!

cretins

bizzare

The Enlightenment would never give the vote to women

only brutally raping and beating up a woman will bring success. Ironically, they have no problem with non-whites doing this

modern Western women love it and think of you as losers for not raping them

...oh, and 'sup, Mary Jane Lick Sick.

That crystal meth - and it's proven effects on memory - certainly taking it's toll: when your 'god' proved you wrong, and in your own sub on Voat, no less, thus you forgot about this in your 'defence' of your Cuck Supreme fschit: cucking himself by giving his Mexican wife absolute control over his liquid assets. Yeah. A 'Warrior of the Manosphere' like him would do something as Feminist, Enlightened & therefore Modernist as that, wouldn't he?! [/Doug Piranha-levels of sarcasm]

Oh, and newsflash:

http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=129067

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/cardiff-imam-jailed-13-years-abusing-girls-mosque-koran-lessons-mohammed-haji-saddique-a7829226.html?cmpid=facebook-post

So much for your 'Sacreds' argument.

Care to actually make some arguments regarding this II?

As I've said time & again, about immigrants arrested, tried & jailed/deported for rape/sexual assaults upon women & underaged victims here in the UK; our police's Zero Tolerance attitude towards rapists/stalkers etc: certainly the British people's attitude towards paedophiles post-Jimmy Savile.

Britain is as Feminist, Modernist & Enlightened as it gets. The above article/FSTDT thread proves that. We certainly blast your entire argument - and therefore your right to think the way you do - out of the space-time continuum.

image

>Filename

So, 'only brutally raping and beating up a woman will bring success. Ironically, they have no problem with non-whites doing this', you say? 'modern Western women love it and think of you as losers for not raping them', you say II? As always, '[citation Seriously Fucking needed]'. Also, the above: from your own blog. Thus proof that it's utterly impossible for you to be 'Moral'. And don't forget:

image

Time for another dose of crystal meth, Mary Jane. It's the only way your 'argument' can possibly survive: in your own personal little dimension that is your subjective 'Opinion'.

Objective Reality - as shown above - proves you wrong. As your own 'god' fschit did in your own sub on Voat.

Perhaps it's time to forget about him...?!

old comment by Anon-e-moose

In Soviet Reddit...:

https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTears/comments/6odf1z/im_a_moderator_of_rinceldiscussions_ama/

image

...Western, Modern, Enlightened cultures feast on you.

Certainly your lies:

Founding Fathers were all products of Enlightenment but deeply religious people

https://lolcow.wiki/wiki/Marjan_%C5%A0ikli%C4%87

Marjan claims to have graduated in history at the University of Zagreb

We have a History expert, Mary Jane: Hasan Prishtina.

The overall performance of Marjan during his years in university was definitely below average, though, since he himself stated various times on his blog that his studies were at that time "awful" and he was reprimanded several times by his parents for doing bad at school.
Because of him being a bad student and because of his complete lack of any knowledge concerning academic research and scientific methods, it remains questionable if Marjan really did graduate. And, in case he actually graduated, it is very likely that his overall grade did not meet the standard set by the numerus clausus for BAs in History in order to continue his studies for an MA

I liked listening to/watching lectures by A.J.P. Taylor: his knowledge of History was quite extensive. So many historians like him usually widen the scope of their knowledge, so they would know about pre- and post-Medieval history too.

As my best friend has a huge collection of wargames (and RPGs/Tabletop games etc), also previously working for a military magazine - and the Ministry of Defence - is interested in military history; from ancient Roman/Greek/Egyptian etc right up to Korean/Vietnam/Gulf War. Extensive & wide of scope.

'Deeply religious people', you say...?:

'I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature'
'There is more need for lighthouses in our country than churches.'
'But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.'
'Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear'
'I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology.'
'Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man'

-Thomas Jefferson

'Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise, every expanded prospect'
'In no instance have... the churches been guardians of the liberties of the people'

-James Madison

'The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion'

-George Washington

Those Founding Fathers would like a word with you.

Education & learning were things they greatly valued, certainly as they were part of the Enlightenment. You have been thoroughly schooled by them, Mary Jane Lick Sick: the pathological liar.

...oh, and another quote by Thomas Jefferson, which is appropriate:

'The only way to combat ridiculous propositions is through mockery'

...such as 'Modern Western women love rape/torture/being killed', unjustifiable - as they are unproven - subjective 'Opinions' which have absolutely no basis in Reality:

image

Also your 'Sacreds' BS.

If he were alive today, he would be a commenter here in FSTDT. Mocking the ridiculous propositions espoused by certain... 'Americans' today. Certainly by anything you say: also think.

It's a fact that anything you... 'think' has had to be spoonfed you by your loverboy - and fellow hypocrite: as he is a product of the Modern, Feminist & Western America, especially it's internet-based Culture - fschit. Because, as proved in the above Wiki link, you can't think. Period.

Certainly for yourself. Otherwise, you would have known about those quotes by those 'deeply religious' Founding Fathers which completely annihilate your 'argument'.

Hasan knows about them. As do so many other students of History. So what's your excuse?

fschmidt #fundie reddit.com

24 comments

Confused?