[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Tor Only

Password (For file deletion.)

Matrix   IRC Chat   Mumble   Telegram   Discord

File: 1714623608413.jpeg ( 47.13 KB , 474x469 , don'tdoit.jpeg )


What are we to do with the ever-increasing agespan of adolescence?
This is a serious problem in the first and second world.
Why is it normalised to waste away your teens and twenties (AND THIRTIES!!!) in quiet despair and zero technical skills?

Generation X and Millennials have normalised mediocrity in youth.
They even say worldly exposure/attributes in youth are elitist.


File: 1714627156724.jpg ( 70.37 KB , 512x512 , 167530993304153138.jpg )

Corrective Rape


I blame suburbs. Also lack of parental engagement, which is mostly because parents don't have time for their kids because of capitalism.


I think parents treat kids as bipedal pets.
They dont engage kids as human beings.

Adults criminalise children having separate social lives from the elderd yet they also criminalise kids interacting with adults.

Also, adults smither kids with endless positivity then accuse them of being pampered.


Your premises are stupid. This is a critique, because you don't have to rely on stupid premises.

Your "they say" is empty; some people say all kinds of bullshit, not everyone you hear say something represents an entire group of people.

The reason that it's like this, in reality is very simple: the capitalist system results in periodic rolling recessions, the last "great recession" absolutely wrecked the job prospects of a large part of gen y, and the stagnating capitalist system simultaneously demands increased profits and increased consumerism, while the state (capitalists and their political serfs in government) wants workers to be docile and distracted.

The end result, in practice, is an expansion of the child as a consumer class - everyone is supposed to run around consuming whatever dumb bullshit, buying thing, and focusing on simplistic identity issues forever whether or not they can even really afford to do so. The price of homes skyrockets due to long-term land speculation, and so young adults are encouraged to, instead, focus on accumulating trinkets and knickknacks and focusing their life on that. Children are voracious consumers, and so artificially expanding the "child" identity into 'adolescence' and adulthood to increase the size of that demographic as the population ages serves to increase profits, while also having perceived (but not necessarily legitimate) social value to parents.

The attack on public colleges some years ago led to more-and-more of skill training being monopolized by for-profit universities; academically, there's no reason why you should need to take up a whole bunch of date to be prepared for good work, but economically there is a great incentive to make this so.

This isn't down to some age group having naughty ideology, it's a broad consequence of a stagnating economic system, and those who regurgitate this in ideology form are, generally, just showing symptoms of the disease.

Ironically, what I'm seeing right now is that a lot of young people are resisting this tendency; they're taking responsibility for themselves to stop what's been going on, because nobody else is going to do it for them. That's what being a responsible adult should mean, more than anything; citizens who see themselves as culpable for the wrongs of the state and responsible for creating a better society. This is the path to curing all the ills of our country and communities.


>take up a whole bunch of date


However: Ypure wrong about children being voracious consumers in the sense that theyre the only ones or thats their only inclination.

Adults are the ones whom create all sortsof tpulys for kids amd themselves.

Also, parents, teachers, and employers discourage young adults from pursuing worldly endeavors.


Youre wrong to blame children as the metaphorical ause for consumerism.

Its adults whom are the biggest consumers. Adults are the ones whom want cars and jewels and sex and other gadgets.

This predates the Victorian philosophy.

Also, people like to complain about pandering to children yet children are the most restricted most patronised group.


Stop letting other people decide what you are and when you're allowed to move on in life, to a place of their choosing. Simple truth of the world is that these stages of development don't in of themselves have spiritual significance. We mark them to know what our body does and will do, and ask questions about ourselves. Too much self-indulgence is retarded and pointless.

According to them, I'm a permanent child or teenager, but I have many of the same expectations as a 40 year old male would have. My body is failing, there are more years behind than ahead given what I know about health and how the institutions will treat me. I've seen enough to reverse-engineer how it should have went, and found that most of humanity is disappointed with their position on the cursus honorum. It presented to you both unrealistic goals that were entirely in the hands of the institutions, and taught people to ignore basic things about themselves. It taught people to place their priorities where the institutions wanted you to place them, and usually these priorities were intended to destroy people as quickly as possible. Placing sexual intercourse at the "base" was never normal and has disastrous effects. Normally, animals under siege and stress do not engage in sexual activity, and that is how we are asked to live. The key is to convince you that you're not under siege by giving people fake sex and porn, disconnecting them further from reality until the trap can be activated. "Oops, wrong planet!" they will tell you.

Usually teenage years suck, and this isn't just a problem of modern institutions. As you become a legal adult, you're expected to be conditioned to a filthy race that loves killing and torture, and then have to maintain kayfabe that it is totally the opposite for the rest of your life, under penalty of torture. The grace of old age is that, having lived enough, we can potentially say nuts to that, and if we die, we die.

With the destruction of technical knowledge - you can only fight against a society designed to poison and torture you so much. They really, really don't want you getting any idea that you can build a single thing without permits and approval. The rulers make it clear they do not want a productive economy. Any productive economy has to be destroyed, because it becomes increasingly difficult to with-hold that product from the commoners and especially from labor. While "doping" the commons with affluence can be temporarily expedient, and the lowest class as a rule can't actually do anything with any wealth they're allowed to pretend they hold, labor with genuine wealth - with property and standing - would see very quickly that they don't need institutions lording over them and herding them like cattle. A problem for labor is that labor's proclivities will tell them that they would themselves be the drovers, lest they become the cattle. There is no middle ground for labor's basic tendencies, even if they have property - and so labor with property is more likely to join the exploitative system and turn on each other, in favor of some association or club they value more than any abstract notion of the working class. This is obviously mal-adaptive and many workers will see that open betrayal and death of fellow workers undermines their position. Very likely the workers also see that if the lowest class is exterminated, a new lowest class will be drafted from their ranks, and so stemming the ritual sacrifice is in the interest of labor generally, unless the lowest class makes a desperate attack against labor in order to survive. It was necessary to weaponize the tendencies of labor to induce them to work against their interests, and find among them those who can be given the promise of bourgeois or higher membership and an alien philosophy that they claim will "lead the workers". It's more complicated than saying "Marx did it", because Marx is just one of the messengers, and Marx primarily wrote to interests within the bourgeoisie who had their own mission.

The main culprit for the destruction of technology is "ignorance is strength" and an insane jabbering that was mandated in the instruction of language, which has the effect of cannibalizing all other knowledge. A whole way of speaking was mandated in education all the way up to university, and learning how to "duckspeak" became obligatory because this was a tool for destruction, for locking out undesirables, and eugenics. By the 1990s it went on for too long, and the last vestiges of human decency were to be broken and humiliated. Far better people than me got "the treatment" while Nazis and the most incorrigible fags were promoted and made highly visible. Make no mistake, the people running this show wanted to burn the United States to the ground, much as they pulled off with the Soviet Union. They don't want any "superstate" existing that would question the preferred aristocratic order of pushing nations to destroy each other within and in bullshit wars. The last one remaining, China, never could be a "full superpower" like the US and USSR were, but it was big enough that it functioned much like one. It's also thoroughly under the thumb of the Empire.


I've always said - if you want to maintain technical knowledge, it is helpful to have libraries to reconstruct and re-educate from the ground up, rather than having to scrounge together WikiHow articles. Fortunately, the WikiHow articles are basically "how to explain technical knowledge to someone who is basically autistic". There are people who can swear by them for a lot of things, but it doesn't explain what science really is. It's better than the non-knowledge you get from school and university.


The moment it appears as if a base for education independent of the institutions can flourish cheaply and by mutual support, the institutions will impose full eugenism. That is where we are at now - they're throwing so much screaming, torture, and death in the face of everyone until the minds of humanity are broken permanently. Failed race.


<Focus on you attention on this or that Generation
Don't look what the ruling classes are doing

good effort post


Im well aware of he elites imposing age segregation in the culture.

Its what Ive been saying in >>477879


>makinh the same shitty schizo thread about a problem that exists only in your mind


>look man delayed adulthood is not a problem!
>Its totally normal to flop badly in youth!


Its easy to tell others to stop imposing their metrics of matiration onto you when youre already out of your prime.
Im talking about how the elders try to shut dowm the natural autonomy/potential of the youth.


Our modern education system is adapted from Protestantism.

People complain about the Catholic Chruch but at last they were always wilking to reform.

Protestants are the real chauvinists.


Im never going to get the opportunity to have a gf and thus have a family, so why bother?


why are you imageboard users so obsesses with procreation?
Theres more to life than romance and family making.


ᴵ ⁿᵉᵛᵉʳ ᵒⁿᶜᵉ ᶠᵉˡᵗ ˢᵃᵈ ᶠᵒʳ ᵐⁱˢˢⁱⁿᵍ ᵒᵘᵗ ᵒⁿ ᵗᵉᵉⁿ ˡᵒᵛᵉ


The youth don't have any property. For those under 40, "you will own nothing and you will be happy" has been their life since adulthood, as they watched their parents robbed in broad daylight with their leaders not only facilitating it but glorifying the theft as good in of itself. What autonomy do you expect someone without any standing to hold against a ruling power that does this, that is so insidious that it taboo to even say what this is and what has been done to us? It has nothing to do with a story about what society should be or what pedagogy tells you society and humans are.

Specifically, it was set up in a way that subverted the Church's traditional standards of education, and replaced it with eugenic ideals and permanent inequality. Protestantism was a step towards that, willfully engaged in a struggle with the "old order" and also against non-Christians, and with each other due to the Christians' favorite past-time of attacking other Christians. A good number of churches are just Satanic at this point and don't even bother hiding it. Really has been what Christianity always was. But, the attack on institutional authority, while doubling down on the myth of institutional impunity, is correctly diagnosed as something that arose out of Protestantism and the struggle against Church property.

Funny thing about the de-Christianizers is that at first, many of them were Deists whose gripe was with the Church holding that much property and seeing an opportunity for more money, rather than fire-breathing heathens who thought religion made your stupid fake and gay. That attitude would be superimposed by the eugenists in revised histories, and certainly there were de-Christianizers given over to forms of total eugenism or just outright Satan-worship under the banner of atheism. But, the German education system was specifically a response to the French Revolution and many of the ideas the Deists held about what a "good religion", or a reformed Christianity, would do. The Germans specifically wanted to make society ungovernable, so that the state and aristocracy step in and sweep aside the rabble. But, they needed this mass army that kicked so much ass. Hilariously, when the Germans finally have their mass national army in the 20th century and talk up how advanced and stronk it is, the Germans proceed to get BTFO twice, the second time bringing eternal shame to their race. It's a wonder Germanism is allowed to continue at all, flabbergasting even. But, it's so useful for its destructive effect on democratic organization.


Young plus a lot of ideology telling us this nonstop if we are rejected and shamed for the decisions of other people. They like having the chilling effect to make us internalize their judgements, and sexual politics is one vector for the disease.

All I can say is, enough fathers and mothers will tell me it's not all it's cracked up to be, and when you think about it, does it matter if your genetic legacy continues? It does say something to be socially rejected, but it is more about the reasons why we're rejected than being alone. If I had something to do with my life and a sense that there was something to leave behind at all - if we weren't all made into objects of mockery so that the same assholes can continue plundering the world and telling us they're the best and brightest - family life isn't all that great. It is well known that so many men never reproduced, maintained sham marriages only so far as it maintained respectability; but men of the lower class were alone often enough that it was a normal condition. The difference is that there wasn't this insane eugenist ideology mandated everywhere, and there weren't the assholes pushing the rot for a cheap thrill. Most men, and this is still true today, know it's a bunch of bullshit and have talked past the chilling effect. Quite a few women tried to say to men, before "inceldom" went apeshit and the eugenics shit was required to survive in the workplace, that this shit wasn't all it was supposed to be. But, it remained the case that those men were not just out of the reproductive game, but cut out of social life altogether and would not be allowed anything. We are not even allowed the simplest writing and ideas of our own. Now we're told to abase ourselves to influencers and shills, and punished for "ownlife" if we "talk funny" - that is, we do not conform to these insane Germanic standards of speech.


criminalise children


unionise children


>ywn enjoy the same quality of life as boomers did
>ywn get a gf
>ywn own a home


File: 1714913863573.jpg ( 104.55 KB , 1024x634 , 1714232505419228m.jpg )

A lot of people just want to be normal. That means getting a stable job, starting a family, eventually buying a house etc etc etc.
"There's more to life than procreation" is kind of true, because there is, but it's also cope. Most people end up having the best experiences of their lives because they found a gf and get a house and so on. Unless you manage to trick your brain into making yourself not desire intimacy, you're always going to feel like you're missing something.


File: 1714920404586.gif ( 2.62 MB , 498x270 , 1714715837929600.gif )

>A lot of people just want to be normal.


>A lot of people just want to be normal.
I don't.

I want to fuck bitches, yes. But only because I want to be free from them.

W*men control this soyciety, and the only way to become free from it is to beat bitches at their own game.


File: 1714931575188.png ( 2.2 MB , 1600x1065 , ClipboardImage.png )

nice quads


Alot of he people who obsess over family making over twenty five.

Also, alot of family men arent realy emotionally invested in their wives and kids.
They just tote them around as consolation prizes.
They take out their misery on the wife and kids and look down on single men.

This is why society is fucked up. Too many adults are too immature to appreciate singlehood.
They think romance and prcoreation are the ultimate prozes in adulthood.

Yet, alot of these married people are bored and desparate. Alot of hookuos areoften married/engaged people looking for some fun outside of the bedroom.


>noooo bro you don't get it if you desire intimacy with the opposite sex you're just immature
Okay man


alot of these married people Are Swingers Being in Denial


The Reality of Hook Up Culture



Theres nothing wrong with wanting intimacy. The problem is that people treat it like a primary need on par with food, water, air, and shelter.

Relationships arent a postpubescent entitlement. They require preliminary training.
Part of why current year culture sucks for relationships are because people arent trained for marriage or working from childhood anymore.

Even the bourgeoise back then had courting lessons for their young.

The primary goal for relationships is resource allocation. Men were reuired to habe a trade or business.
Women were reuired to cook, clean, and tend the children.

Unfortunately, people think this utilitarian philosophy as dehumanising nowadays.


File: 1714957898061.png ( 813.39 KB , 887x720 , 167530993304153471.png )

>courting lessons for their young.
i hate my parents
>The problem is that people treat it like a primary need on par with food, water, air, and shelter.
We still need the pack though


You dumb fucks actually believe the ideology intended to destroy you, lol.

No relationships = no babies, no more "you" in any sense. If this were merely about genetic procreation of the body it's no big deal, but "the personal is political" and this society is ruled by eugenics. Rejection is used as an excuse to be shitty and begin a cycle of running down anything else we would do. The whole point of the rejection rituals is to wipe us out from any historical existence, to make us living abortions - living symbols of their victory and nothing more. Eugenics knows no other way.

So here's the truth - no one, male or female, actually thinks "the relationship" is magical. The relationship is a means to an end - raising children, who themselves have some interest in living. Ask those who grew up in broken homes how great this ideology has been for them, and then add all of the ways institutions destroy peoples' private life to see who benefits from this. Then they tell us this is "our" idea. It's insidious and everyone advancing it is an asshole.

In another time, we'd find a hobby and be respected enough to endure living through this shit - or at least some of us would. It was never a good life for losers, but there was still a possibility of something, if we were crazy enough to think humanity could actually work. Usually, though, "society" was just too weak to hunt us down, and we were able to salvage something society had yet to take away. That was no longer possible in the 20th century, and enclosing that last possibility was a necessary condition.


Also, the idea that the "ideal family" extends into antiquity and prehistory is a shitty understanding. For most of history, families had slaves and children were expected to learn chores. Without children being caged on schools to break them psychologically, they had time to do chores and take on obligations as they aged, if they were going to be allowed. Children who "weren't going to make it" were either killed or sold into slavery.


But, there weren't any "socially necessary" rules that were uniform or that could be imposed on the world, in the way that became expected by the ideology of the 20th century. Realistically, young men were expected to go out to the world, however poorly they were prepared for that. Being told you can't do that was the mark of a slave, and once a man was marked as a slave, he was always going to be treated as a slave. He'd have to claw his way out to freedman status, and the only ones who survived and made something of that had to learn quickly how to fight in a world that rejected them. Usually "freedmen" were de facto slaves with an obligation to their former master, and stayed on as paid employees because it was stable. But, the ancient world being what it was, if you were a liability, you were dead. Humanity is a Satanic race. The idea that it was different was one of the most insidious lies.


In case you think the 20th century made things bright and hopeful… these functions were taken on by the state, subsumed by eugenics, human resources, and the "helpers". Now they cut up our brains, keep us around to be tortured in ways the Romans would find foul, and tell us "this is the best of all worlds and if you don't like it, you must be retarded". They were never going to let us in their society, and why would we even want that? If they wanted something functional, with or without us, the actions of states and institutions would be very different. It wouldn't even be a question about giving people their fucking land back and ending the regime of debt slavery, like it's hard. It would be the easiest thing and would immediately improve productivity. There are certainly enough people who will gladly work for their mutual security, more than enough to overcome the people who are habitual assholes, who are the only people who actually think this shit could work. But, we're not allowed something so simple and basic. That's "utopian", for some bizarre reason. Their idiotic plans and braying about how they're going to change the world for the worse are never "utopian" or "retarded" though, even though they have a record of dismal failure.


Anyway, this disgusting mentality was now mandated in every relationship a human has with another human, and policed rigorously. In the past, there was a point where humans cut the bullshit, realized they really had no reason to attack each other over this shit, and found a way to get on with their life, whatever it was going to be. Sane people don't think their relationships are a duty to the state or some abstract notion of society. If they are seen as a duty, the duty is begrudgingly taken on, and the "successful" man tries to make his life work after attaining this thing that is obligatory in patriarchal societies. The woman takes it on because she didn't have much of a choice. Making and raising babies was the primary job available to her, unless she was a slave. Slaves in most of history are not prolific breeders. If she thought anything of it at all, she probably thought about how to humiliate her husband, because they all knew the real sex was in some orgy and no one had any reason to care as long as they could continue living. But, what really kept families intact is that most of humanity was rural, and there weren't that many people you could be with. So much of humanity lived and died outside of the historical record, far removed from events that were relevant for political history. So much of what we see now had been latent for a long time, but it was not until recently that the rural population were brought into civilization fully and made to conform to an insane system.


Some idiots think this is an argument for "primitivism", not getting that rural people lived this way not because it was ideal or natural, but because that was what settlements existed. The big thing that marked you as "making it" was that piece of land that you could rely on if times were good. I'd rather take land over promises that no one has any reason to keep. Land doesn't disappear the moment you touch it. The deeds might, but people have a habit of clinging to that land for dear life. It's not like people believe the city will liberate them, because they usually knew the only thing in the city was slavery and death, with lots of sick orgies and Satanic shit going on at the core. Some people might like that sort of thing if they think they can get in the club, but usually people came to cities because there was some opportunity or, more often, because they were expropriated and the cities were the only place to go.


Believe it or not, there was a time when civil engineers saw that this lifestyle was a problem, and that's one reason why modern cities are designed to be almost "not a city" in their layout, rather than what cities were for most of human history.


File: 1714988021821.png ( 164.69 KB , 1280x970 , ClipboardImage.png )

>no you don't get it you're not entitled to it!
I AM entitled to it. I AM entitled to a happy life.


File: 1714988399850.jpg ( 181.8 KB , 1486x991 , ca-times.brightspotcdn.jpg )



Lib detected


>how dare you question my entitlement syndrome

Nobody owes you a magical sex/romantic life.
Thats not essential to living.
Stop thinking with your dick.


File: 1715030763540.gif ( 1.99 MB , 332x215 , laugh-nicholas-cage.gif )

>Nobody is entitled to a w*manx body except Chad
wow, so powerful


>Nobody owes you a magical sex/romantic life.
yeah, fine, fine, we got it normoid

we aren't owed shit, but it just SO HAPPENS that we owe shit to everyone around us, funny how that works

Roman Senate said that veterans aren't owed shit either, and look how that turned out lol

be careful with what you say, dumbfuckoid


I'm not that anon.
I also am not an incel, but wether you like it or not sex and romantic relationships are part of the human experience and required to live a happy life.

Yo shoving your head up your own ass won't change that. Sex is a literal biological necessity.


File: 1715031887063.jpg ( 54.61 KB , 428x970 , 1714988399850.jpg )

The left one is kinda hot



Sex and romance arent essential. Youre just moralising your penis tingles.
Also, you equating your horniness to war veterans is annoying.
Those people actually done something with their lives other than whine about being lonely.
And the entitlememt for sex and romanxe is why we have so mamy dysfunctional families.


if sex is a biological necessity, then we should stop criminalising teenage sexuality.
We should recognise that puberty is the start of adulthood.

We should recognise that the deprivation of potential of the youth is due to artifical extension of childhood.


We have to have it for imageboard users with pathological entitlement syndrome


Boomers OUT


You're just projecting your misery onto others and invoking eugenics


>nah youre projecting! how dare you downplay my libido as being less than war veterans whom suffer from actual economic and mental problems.




>Sex and romance arent essential.
says who? some feminoid bitch with a body count in the thousands?

the Senate said that land isn't essential either, who gives a fuck?

If incels decide that sex is essential and are capable of enforcing such decision with organized violence, that's all that matters.

>Also, you equating your horniness to war veterans is annoying.

I'm equating social groups to social groups, dumbfuck.

That men get promised a wife has been a part of the social contract since time immemorial. YOU BROKE IT, so violence it is.


You're not wrong intimacy is a need, but if you bully women into submission, that flips epigenetic switches in biology, and you'll get a society of weak people that will get conquered.


If Sex and Romance are essential maybe we should start by de-criminalising youth sexuality.


>maybe we should start by de-criminalising youth sexuality

Anon tries not to be a pedo: 0 days without incident.


File: 1715587964126.jpeg ( 273.46 KB , 1024x806 , IMG_0357.jpeg )

Is that so?


>youth sexuality is pedophilic

>but postpubescent trainwrecks should be allowed sex because its a "natural" right


those war veterns went slayed many enemies so of course theyd be promised virginal wives.

Have you done anything other than lurk on imageboards bitching about perpetual virginity?


Yeah and ordinary people were promised that if they worked hard and were good citizens, they would be able to get a home, meet a girl and have a family, etc, the American dream, but it’s not really limited to America.


File: 1715654624094.png ( 9.34 MB , 2239x3152 , ClipboardImage.png )

I agree


>Anon tries not to be a pedo: 0 days without incident.
I think this is a performance, Anon likely isn't a pedo, he just plays a bit because he wants to annoy you and get a rise out of you. Real pedos usually aren't so direct, they usually rant against things that protect children. Like strong digital encryption, and strong online privacy, those mechanisms block predators from stalking their pray.

Two year ago there was a research group that suggested fitting children with a simple bio-signs-logger that would log stress-levels. It would have enhanced early abuse detection if used in combination with non-intrusive psych-evals. You know what happened when that got some traction, the indirect pedos began screaming about blocking children from using social media. That isn't just a completely ineffective measure for keeping children safe, because social media can also be a means to call for help. It also succeed in getting everybody distracted and the really effective child protection measure based on a stress monitor went into the collective memory hole.


top tier reference


>Like strong digital encryption, and strong online privacy
I can think of one reason why a pedo would like these 2 things.


What you're implying is not a reasonable argument. If you weaken encryption and privacy. You enable a lot of organizations and groups to cyber-stalk children that are using all this technology with compromised safety. This is war on child-safety.

First is that you can't controle who uses the holes in digital safety technology. So things like compromised encryption and less than super strong privacy benefits the criminal element first and foremost. For example you can't make a backdoor that only works for "legitimate investigations" (i forget the correct jargon). Lots of other people will find these technical weaknesses and exploit them. Governments and companies are also leaky as fuck, so it doesn't necessarily require a lot of technical expertise for that to happen.

Second if you enable the police , the spies and of course the tech-companies, to breach privacy, that will attract all the perverts (including the pedo-type) to join these institutions and organizations. Do you really want that ? Isn't that creeping you out ? Or is this some twisted logic of cultural power where cyber-stalking becomes a privilege of rank/status.

We're also not living in a peaceful world, very powerful hostile entities will use the compromised digital safety to wage cyber attacks. So compromised encryption and weakened privacy also endangers lives.

Lets not forget what happens in Gaza where digital tracking is used to mass-murder people. Do you really want to import that ? Do you want to live in a world where the Zuckerbergs of the world can just tap a screen and then a competitor dies? Do you want corrupt career politicians to be able to tap a screen and then their critics die ? And of course this tech will never work properly, and it will also kill lots of random people. Do you want cyber barbarism ?

Lets not forget that historic processes aren't linear. Beware of the limited shelf-life of surveillance terror as a means of controlling people through fear. On a population level fear eventually turns into cold effective rage, and then history will make sharp turns again.


Most of our active pedophiles are usually authority figures.


Anything pertaining to children/young adults almost always referncing to sexual purity.

People think that youth is supposed to be a hugbox where not evn the tiniest particle of dirt is allowed.

And the irony is?
Kids whom are excessively sheltered from the real world are often the most likely to be prey.

Innocence is a self-fullfilling prophecy


Back then, most people were tradesmen.

Also the whole "American Dream" thing was orginally meant obly for GIs.


This. Also why so many pedos are in church. Every goddamn Abrahamic religion teaches that your self worth comes from an outside authority figure, making them sitting ducks for kid diddelers.


Seems pretty biased, you think other religions don't have a problem with pedophiles in positions of authority? It's a problem in cults, and it's a problem in martial arts, gymnastics, and other kids' sports. In the end it doesn't have anything to do with religion or any other ideology, it's about creating positions of authority with little or no accountability that involve children.


this. and these same authority figures whom have tgeir way with kids would flip out about kids having precocious abilities


The creation and extension of adolescence is a key ingredient in the dumbing down of society.

It encourages victim morality.


There was a period of teenaged years where a grown man was still seen as "not an established man". You weren't counted among the ranks of men until you made something of yourself, got married and did your time. If you didn't make it, well, you lost and you were relegated to the dustbin of history nearly every time.

The real dumbing down came from promoting this idea that life would be on rails, controlled by the institutions, and that you're supposed to meet this benchmarks to be considered scientifically human. That was a new thing. A failed man was still seen as a man and allowed to go through life if he wasn't a bother to anyone, worked, paid taxes, did the basic things even though there was nothing for him in this world. So many lives were spent on miserable toil and whatever distractions they could find, until settling on beer as the best distraction. The sad thing is that such misery is paradise compared to what eugenics wants for everyone. That grind was too decent, so they gave us this degradation instead.

All of this is intended to heighten human inequality and essentialize it, say it was hereditary. Eugenics insists on it. The bare minimum of life is now humiliation and torture in the open. The thrill of torture must be maximized - that is the way set for us now.


Really though, as someone who is officially Old, you are all overthinking this by a lot. Just by talking to people over the years and actually listening, you will learn that there's no there there about "making it". Only thing to make is a piece of land allowing some level of security and detachment from the bullshit. That would not be onerously expensive, except for a drive to deprive that simple thing from everyone without obligation to an alien society that wants most of us dead and brags about it.


Society gatekeeps the mantle of adulthood from young men too much.

In fact this is something else I wanted to discuss.

Maturity is reduced to pissing contest.

>"Youre not a man if you dont (insert absurd activity here)


child labor is kinda based idc what anyone says. I gaurantee that if Marx or hisilk came back from the dead amd saw the current state of academia amd child rearing he would advocate for firther emphasis on child labor.


Marx would not support child-labor because that increases the labor supply, creating more wage competition.


Marx was a supporter of child labor.
But not the way that capitalists were doing it.


I understand that the capitalists did universal education because they needed more educated workers, and a place to store the children while parents wage-slaved. But that doesn't make it a bad thing, the Soviets and all the other socialist projects did the same thing, they also send children to school.

However I'm willing to hear you out on what you think Marx wanted and how it differs from what capitalism did.


Marx said children should start working st age nine and be given moderate hours


In the 18 hundreds children often began working in the fields or factories when they were six years old and often had to work long shifts.

I can't be bother to check if your assertion is true.
So if Marx suggested to raise the work-force entry-age to 9 years as well as reducing the hours to "moderate" , that would make him somebody who sought to reduce child-labor, relative to the usual praxis of his time.


regardless I think kids should be involved in theprocess of industriaility.

Adults accuse kids of being lazy leeches but ban kids from the real world.

Also, academic skills dont mean shit in the real world.


I think this needs to be discussed more.
People complain about ableism amd ageism but then talks about "brain development" as an excuse to disqualify young people from worldly affairs.

Unique IPs: 33

[Return][Catalog][Top][Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]