You have to list your policies and pitch them to a normie. What do you say?

submitted by NeoRail from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]NeoRail[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Really? Not even a single policy? There is absolutely nothing in your political platform that the average person could find appealing or compelling, to any extent?

[–]Node 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Correct. As the joke goes, 9 out of 10 people enjoy a good gang rape.

A casual observation of our civilization and societies will reveal that far more than 9 out of 10 are either supporting or tolerating the current state of affairs. Rectifying this situation is more of an ideal than a policy, but it needs to happen.

Misanthropy may be motivated by contempt for the prevailing characteristics of humanity. ♔

Is it OK to be a misanthrope?

Misanthropy isn't an unhealthy way to look at humanity and society in general, it's by far the most realistic. Misanthropy is wanting to like your fellow humans but them making it nearly impossible.

Even among those claiming to be unhappy with the evil that pervades our species, very, very few are sitting on the edge of their seats just waiting for someone else to go first. It is this embodiment of toleration, and worse, that needs to go.

Engaging in 'politics' in this situation is like trying to use something that's completely broken. Then seeing it's completely broken, but trying again.

My guess is that this would be pretty close to the very definition of 'unpopular policy'.

[–]NeoRail[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

A casual observation of our civilization and societies will reveal that far more than 9 out of 10 are either supporting or tolerating the current state of affairs.

Unless you are living in a hut in the forest, you are "tolerating" the system too. Modern life occurs within the system, so naturally modern people necessarily have to "tolerate" it. Yours is an impossibly high bar to impose on the broad mass of people. Not to mention that barring the past three hundred years, for the entire rest of world history it was perfectly normal and healthy for at least a good 95% of the people to be completely apolitical. The amount of intelligence, education, time and effort necessary to understand politics successfully is far beyond the reach of the average person. Do not be too demanding.

Engaging in 'politics' in this situation is like trying to use something that's completely broken. Then seeing it's completely broken, but trying again.

Being able to articulate yourself on a political level does not imply throwing all of your efforts into lost causes.

My guess is that this would be pretty close to the very definition of 'unpopular policy'.

None of this is policy, you are just talking rheoric right now, so you would be wrong. "Unpopular rhetoric" may be a more accurate description.

[–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I find myself severely chastened by your correction, and you are right.

Yours is an impossibly high bar to impose on the broad mass of people.

And yet I do. Hence my disquiet and disparagement. How did the quality of our species become so 'god-awful'? And what are we going to do about it? (rhetorical questions)

it was perfectly normal and healthy for at least a good 95% of the people to be completely apolitical.

That was probably fine as long as they weren't willingly or stupidly joining the human botnets used to attack the rest of us. In current year, huge numbers of those people vote, as they're told, and even after they're dead. Even our putative 'legislators' vote on multi-thousand page legislation, without even reading, knowing what it is, or how it works.

It's not just the masses who fall far below a normal standard.

Unless you are living in a hut in the forest, you are "tolerating" the system too.

True, there is some hypocrisy, but it's required to continue living. I would designate a nonlinear divide somewhere between those who literally support (financially or otherwise) our overlords, versus those who simply continue existing, or even work to bring them down.

But as you say, and if my points have any validity, this is all pointless rhetoric.

[–]NeoRail[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Look, if you are buying food and water, you are "financially supporting the overlords" - not just with your purchases, but also with the taxes you pay on them. Your thinking is too binary, which is why you have reached the conclusions that you have. Very few people can attain anything even vaguely resembling the basically unilateral independence that you are promoting as a universal standard. If you insist on maintaining this impossible standard, you will always be disappointed, and it will be your fault, because you are deliberately refusing to accept a more realistic view. If you are really interested in improving the moral condition of society, then start with yourself, since when it comes to your own person, you have full control. If you are interested in doing this, then do your best in developing accurate views of reality and abandon inaccurate ones. Be rational and objective. Look up virtue ethics if you need a basis for your personal conduct. Getting that far is already plenty.

[–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Very few people can attain anything even vaguely resembling the basically unilateral independence that you are promoting as a universal standard.

Agreed.

[–]Nombre27 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Our countries and institutions have become so pluralistic and leftward oriented that it's pretty hard to have a nationalistic policy proposal that isn't strongly opposed.

[–]NeoRail[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

How about an end to offshoring? Not even that?

[–]Nombre27 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You'd probably get strong opposition from corporations (and thus the MSM) since our governments have stopped caring about enacting laws beneficial to the citizenry, and possibly a "you're hurting the poor" by not letting poor people on the other side of the world manufacture our goods for next to nothing.

I don't disagree with your suggestion(s), I just don't see any real solutions coming into existence under the current regime. Everything has gotten so out of control.

[–]NeoRail[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You'd probably get strong opposition from corporations (and thus the MSM) since our governments have stopped caring about enacting laws beneficial to the citizenry, and possibly a "you're hurting the poor" by not letting poor people on the other side of the world manufacture our goods for next to nothing.

When I said "popular policies", I meant popular with the people, more specifically apolitical normies.

I don't disagree with your suggestion(s), I just don't see any real solutions coming into existence under the current regime. Everything has gotten so out of control.

I am not proposing anything, I am just curious as to what policies people are considering important and how they would justify them to the common people.