Invite link: https://groomercord.com/invite/DSKPrnWuGj
Update: I have been banned for reacting to a single message with a based department pepe
Reported by:
- Cumeatr : Do you even get reports on these anymore? I still want to see what the cool kids are talking about
- DuckPioneer : so try being cool
Weโre in the antiworkcord
- 156
- 102
Top Poster of the Day:
J
Current Registered Users: 25,630
BROWSE EFFORTPOSTS
SITE GUIDE
HOLES
PING GROUPS
Live commit: b40847a
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Pacifism is probably the most r-slurred "ideology" out there. The other side isn't going to stop their onslaught, especially with a newly formed socialist state that threatens their stability. In order for socialism to succeed enemies and traitors have to be taken seriously. It's just the sad reality
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
They have absolutely no delusions about the other side sparing them. Thatโs not pacifism. Pacifism entails making the moral choice that, despite the fact that it will definitely not be okay, they are willing to accept that to forgo committing what is to them, an even greater evil. It is also for this reason that pacifists cannot be helpless, as that defeats the whole moral potency of pacifism, the fact that it is a choice. Likewise, the imposition of pacifism also means itโs not a choice. Pacifism is also virtually dead as an ideology. I know of no pacifists except the Anabaptists and the Jains, not in real life anyway.
Have you noticed that no totalitarian state will tolerate pacifists? Theyโre not exactly worthy enemies.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Sounds stupid
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Do you think itโs stupid if they know, or is it more unwise?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I think it's stupid in general and it's basically a suicide cult
And trying to spread this so called morality only makes it easier for people to be oppressed
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
This is the first time Iโve heard โactively malicious, want people to be oppressedโ as an explanation for pacifists. Not sure I agree with that.
But I generally use them as a litmus test to determine whether Iโm speaking with an ideologue. The rejection of someone elseโs pacifism directly entails insisting that the pacifist must kill. It is basically a statement that for someone else to refuse to kill is literally intolerable.
Since everyone absolutely loathes pacifists, who are by definition harmless, I generally take from this that almost everyone is a bloodthirsty extremist.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context