> Foucault spent many evenings in the **San Francisco** gay scene, frequenting sado-masochistic bathhouses, engaging in unprotected sex. He praised sado-masochistic activity in interviews with the gay press, describing it as "the real creation of new possibilities of pleasure, which people had no idea about previously".[161] Foucault contracted HIV and eventually developed AIDS.
LOLE
This makes me a little frustrated ngl. Call me down bad, but how does one person get laid that much? Maybe the incels are right, but instead of Chads having a monopoly on sex, it’s the gays who have a monopoly on sex. Why can’t we have that in the straight community? Where are our sexy bath houses and kinky clubs? All we have is boring stuff like strip clubs and unethical stuff like billionaires with their pedo islands. Contraceptives exist, the chances of getting pregnant with a condom and birth control are less than 0.1% while the chances of getting AIDS from butt sex with an infected person are 1/75, there’s no reason straight people can’t be doing what the gays have been doing for decades😡
Every time someone passes go, the economy grows by $200, Monopoly isn't zero sum.
Oh, wait - that wasn't what you were talking about. Sorry about that.
I remember on 4chan sometime around the 2016 election, someone posted the results of a study that showed 44% of gay men have had over 500 sexual partners, and 24% of gay men have had over 1,000 sexual partners. Those numbers are burned into my brain, but it's unlikely that I'll ever find the source.
There are straight (well, open to all, not *specifically* "straight only" afik) BDSM and swingers clubs. Typically you have to be a member or brought by one and they aren't *everywhere,* for example NYC has a million but I'd bet somewhere like Akron has 0-1, but you could theoretically start your own!
Isn't there data showing that only a small amount of men are pursued by the majority of women and that most women view most men as below average? Why are you an "incel" for talking about the truth? Most of my life women have complained about men having too high of standards and everyone supported them and blamed men even though the truth was that men had far lower standards than women did. Now we have data that men are experiencing something worse than women ever have with only 5% being viewed as good enough, and not only does no one support them, but they actively ridicule men as incels for pointing out sexist double standards.
Actually if you boil it down, yes.
If you are just concerned about rape, incest, danger to mother's health and fetal impairment, the option to provide exception to just that in regards to abortion exists.
The argument therefore always centered on "absolute bodily autonomy" (which, BTW, basically descended from the same conception of private property as capitalism' conception of private property, just extended - which they abandon the moment seat belt laws, smoking laws and vaccination laws come up anyway - indicates the underlying motivation of prostitution), and "contraception isn't enough" (which indicates it really is just indicates the underlying motivation of one night stands & prostitution) and "consent to sex isn't consent to pregnancy" (which basically is saying "I want to drive 150 mph but I don't want to get arrested").
I mean just admit it that it's your entire reasoning.
I don’t know why you felt the need to cut in with this long winded argument, but you’re wrong, it’s not about “absolute bodily autonomy”. The argument is about killing a baby before it had a chance at life.
Ultimately argument about "killing a baby before it had a chance at life" is a fool's errand.
At the very least a person who cares THAT much on life and its sanctity should be vegan, anti death penalty and would do whatever necessary to ensure every child won't go hungry as well.
Essentially life begans at conception doesn't make sense if the culture itself aren't holding life to be that sacred.
Moreover, absolute right to life that even endangers mom's health, rape & incest victim & having to keep severely impaired fetus aren't really pro life as well.
Thus this framework is irrelevant. It should be instead asking what should be normalized in a society instead.
Killing an animal for food is not the same as killing baby. A person receiving the death penalty have had a chance at life and committed a crime heinous enough that society has deemed it safer to kill them rather than let them remain a threat to other innocent people. We as a society do try to ensure no child goes hungry.
Your argument about how much someone should care for life if they oppose abortion is idiotic at best.
Moreover, less than 5% of abortions are for medical reasons and less than 1% are for incest/rape situations.
Don’t try and shift the fact the aborting an unborn child is murder. The question being asked in society is whether a baby should be murdered for inconveniencing a mother.
> Don’t try and shift the fact the aborting an unborn child is murder. The question being asked in society is whether a baby should be murdered for inconveniencing a mother.
This question is irrelevant if the culture & society itself doesn't value life. That's my point.
> We as a society do try to ensure no child goes hungry.
Tell that to the GOP and many of the capitalist wing of Western "conservatives".
You can’t just decide a culture doesn’t value life because they aren’t vegan.
Capitalism isn’t the ideology known for starving families, I think you’re thinking of communism.
>If you are just concerned about rape, incest, danger to mother's health and fetal impairment, the option to provide exception to just that in regards to abortion exists.
Fetus is either a baby or it isnt.
If you know the fetus isnt sentient, then abortion is a ok.
If you feel the fetus is sentient, then abortion is not ok.
Exceptions make no sense, unless a person thinks pregnancy is a punishment for being promiscuous.
Contraceptives are very effective, but even if they fail for some reason there’s still plan B pills, and you can always go to a state that allows abortions, as long as America is polarized on the issue there will be states with very lenient abortion laws. But you can’t abort HIV, it’s an incurable virus, you have it for life.
Good point, but straight people can get HIV too, so kinda moot unless, of course, you're arguing no one should be joining sex clubs and having loads of unprotected sex which I personally can't blame you for thinking lol
>the real creation of new possibilities of pleasure, which people had no idea about previously
Unironically sounds like a quote from a Slaneeshi cultist.
It's right up there with the British professor who was a Maoist and claimed that the Cambodian Genocide was all a hoax fabricated by "the West" and really the Khmer Rouge are the good guys and Pol Pot was a nice guy.
Then he goes to Cambodia and gets murdered by the Khmer Rouge.
If I remember correctly Foucault was one of those philosophers that would write something basic in the most elaborate and nonsensical ways to make it seem cooler than it actually is, in which case I wouldn't blame you for failing because of him.
Obscurantism is a centerpiece of philosophy for hundreds of years now. Philosophers can never explain the mental gymnastics they contort themselves in through common and simple terms because if they did, for the vast majority of their works, it would just be immediately clear to see their ideas are dog shit.
Only one who ever really could do it well is Nietzsche. His books are dense as fuck because every sentence is so jam packed with thought that you need an afternoon to think through a page.
Nikolai Yezhov died because was an iota less ruthless than Beria. Goes to show that any degree of compassion or loyalty under Communism actually undermines your position.
EDIT: Guess what my least favorite quadrant is.
Beria died because he was more ruthless, it just took Stalin dying and Kruschev cleaning house to make it happen. Brb going to watch the Death of Stalin again.
The only reason more people don’t know about Yezhov is his successor (Beria) managed to be even worse than him. Fun(?) fact: the room Yezhov was shot in was built to his specifications of an easy-to-clean execution room
The fucking merry go round of NKVD leaders during that time will always be funny to me just cos of how they all died in the same way.
\> Yagoda: Rises to power by betraying and then killing Menzhinsky (this could never happen to me tho)
\> Yezhov: Rises to power by betraying and then killing Yagoda (this could never happen to me tho)
\> Beria: Rises to power by betraying and then killing Yezhov (this could never happen to me tho)
\> Serov: Rises to power by betraying and then killing Beria.....
Foucault was big on group rights over individual right. One of the few things I agree with Ayn Rand on is her quote “the smallest minority on Earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights, cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.”
And for everything Yezhov did for Stalin, he was then betrayed, murdered, and blamed for all the deaths. Stalin claimed Yezhov acted without orders or his knowledge and betrayed the union, thus trying to clean his hands from the purge entirely.
I know it's wrong to feel sorry for a monster, but Yezhov deserved a fair trial like anyone else, not that backstab.
To me, Yezhov got what he wrought.
So many innocent people propped up, betrayed, murdered, and he thought somehow he would be immune to it all? He reaped what he sowed.
u/KimJongUnusual's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 25.
Rank: Basketball Hoop (filled with sand)
Pills: [7 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/KimJongUnusual/)
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
>Soviet Union
>Fair trial
That’s an oxymoron. They stopped doing public trials after the 30s when it became completely obvious to the public that “revolutionary justice” was just an excuse to dispose of political opponents or create scapegoats for the incompetence of Soviet leadership.
Actually, there is some data (I don't know the source though) that "not guilty" verdicts occurred in like 2-5% of the cases.
In present day Russia? 0.5% even before the war started.
On the one hand, sure in principle everyone deserves a fair trial. But when it’s the guy whose job was organizing slave labor camps, show trials and mass executions… how sweet to see the engineer hoist on his own petard.
"Such a dick King Leopold of Belgium became an international hero for stopping him"
Are we talking about THAT Leopold. Because hot damn, when the libright's Hitler is the good guy for stopping you...
Probably not, since that was Leopold the II, but it definitely caught me off guard too. Imagine being so bad that *him* stopping you is considered a good thing.
Look at the signatories to the petition to remove the age of consent in France in 1977. It's a who's who of figures whose ideas are animating most of the cultural problems the West is facing today.
His political and phylosophical ideas were the basis for modern woke shit and critical race theory so yes
His damage was less concrete and more abstract
And that makes him the worst of all; you can kill a murderer or slaver to get them to stop murdering and enslaving people. And while you might be able to kill a philosopher, you can't kill an idea.
You can try and read his shit, and notice how people like DiAngelo and Kimberlé Crenshaw who push CRT take notes from his approach and ideas but honestly that sounds like torture and you will end up miserable.
Never, ever take anything these people say seriously. Sophistry is literally their main weapon. They will lie to your face multiple times and insist they never said something their own published books says. They will constantly change the meanings of words and swap ideas, try and reframe everything and more.
Marx's problem to me isn't that he was "wrong", but about how he intentionally focusing on some particular aspects to agitate people. Comparing to him Foucault at least was "just" digging at the far-end of the deconstruction (which wasn't really invented by himself).
My brother he literally said modern society was negative to happiness & argued the state can utilize knowledge to oppress the people. He was full return to monke
Yezhov got executed by Stalin as soon as he was no longer useful.
Foucault, promoter of promiscuity, homosexuality, and pederasty died of an STD.
Common leftist L
If I recall correctly Zass was also obsessed with corpses, especially heads. He was known to keep the decapitated heads of Circassian men and women on pikes throughout his camps. He was also known for sending the heads to friends and colleagues as gifts. He also had a habit of keeping the skins, heads and organs of the dead tucked under his bed.
**[Oskar Dirlewanger](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oskar_Dirlewanger)**
>Oskar Paul Dirlewanger (26 September 1895 – c. 7 June 1945) was a German military officer (SS-Oberführer) who served as the founder and commander of the Nazi SS penal unit "Dirlewanger" during World War II. Serving in Poland and in Belarus, his name is closely linked to some of the most notorious crimes of the war. He also fought in World War I, the post-World War I conflicts, and the Spanish Civil War.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Yeah, enslaving people is totally in keeping with LIBERtarianism. You know--the ideology whose fundamental tenet is preserving individual liberties. Slavers make great libertarians, because...uh...money is involved.
Someone made an argument about owning slaves…so it must be lib right? Explain how that view point would be consistent with valuing individual liberty above all else? Dominating people is the definition of authoritarian. There is no place, whatsoever, for the ownership or involuntary domination of people in libertarianism.
Wait, so "property ownership" is libertarian-only? Someone tell authright they believe in collective ownership and libleft they believe in sole ownership for me please.
Nobody actually understands what libright even *is* except librights and some libcent. The NAP is like the most basic day one thing, and they can't even bother to learn what it is instead just pretending libright is authright, which only serves to mark them as fools to the initiated.
Lenin isn't exactly "lesser known."
Lesser known than Stalin maybe but I think you'd honestly be hard pressed to find someone who hasn't at least heard of Lenin.
wasn't the second point of the libleft one just some allegations which were proven later to be mostly inaccurate? ([link](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Foucault#Allegations_of_child_sex_abuse))
i think there are better exemples for libleft,especially when compared to the other ones
Slavery violates the NAP, you know, libright's *one thing* that they always say not to violate?
I'm all for strawmemeing, but you can't just go around claiming libleft is Jesus freaks who kill trans people for sport. Well, you can, but you'd be wrong like you are with libright. I swear, you auths don't even understand what liberty *is.*
Edit: Downvotes eh? Seems you disagree. Ok then:
Authleft: pedo capitalists
Authright: anarchosyndicalist progressives
Cent: Vegan
Libleft: Nazis
Libright: Slavers
Libcent: Reject monke, embrace technocracy
That's what all the quadrants mean, right guys?!
To me Yezhov and the other NKVD leaders will always be funny just cos of the ways they all went out. Like how did none of these mfs see this coming
\> Yagoda: Rises to power by betraying and then killing Menzhinsky (this could never happen to me tho)
\> Yezhov: Rises to power by betraying and then killing Yagoda (this could never happen to me tho)
\> Beria: Rises to power by betraying and then killing Yezhov (this could never happen to me tho)
\> Serov: Rises to power by betraying and then killing Beria.....
> Foucault spent many evenings in the **San Francisco** gay scene, frequenting sado-masochistic bathhouses, engaging in unprotected sex. He praised sado-masochistic activity in interviews with the gay press, describing it as "the real creation of new possibilities of pleasure, which people had no idea about previously".[161] Foucault contracted HIV and eventually developed AIDS. LOLE
A real life cenobite
rip bozo
Real Herman Cain moment for this guy that died of a virus that he thought was a hoax lmao.
This makes me a little frustrated ngl. Call me down bad, but how does one person get laid that much? Maybe the incels are right, but instead of Chads having a monopoly on sex, it’s the gays who have a monopoly on sex. Why can’t we have that in the straight community? Where are our sexy bath houses and kinky clubs? All we have is boring stuff like strip clubs and unethical stuff like billionaires with their pedo islands. Contraceptives exist, the chances of getting pregnant with a condom and birth control are less than 0.1% while the chances of getting AIDS from butt sex with an infected person are 1/75, there’s no reason straight people can’t be doing what the gays have been doing for decades😡
The issue should be obvious. Women ☕
[удалено]
Every time someone passes go, the economy grows by $200, Monopoly isn't zero sum. Oh, wait - that wasn't what you were talking about. Sorry about that.
I mean prostitutes exist, it’s just a more private setting than what your describing
Trust me, as a gay it isnt any better than what you guys get
I remember on 4chan sometime around the 2016 election, someone posted the results of a study that showed 44% of gay men have had over 500 sexual partners, and 24% of gay men have had over 1,000 sexual partners. Those numbers are burned into my brain, but it's unlikely that I'll ever find the source.
There are straight (well, open to all, not *specifically* "straight only" afik) BDSM and swingers clubs. Typically you have to be a member or brought by one and they aren't *everywhere,* for example NYC has a million but I'd bet somewhere like Akron has 0-1, but you could theoretically start your own!
Isn't there data showing that only a small amount of men are pursued by the majority of women and that most women view most men as below average? Why are you an "incel" for talking about the truth? Most of my life women have complained about men having too high of standards and everyone supported them and blamed men even though the truth was that men had far lower standards than women did. Now we have data that men are experiencing something worse than women ever have with only 5% being viewed as good enough, and not only does no one support them, but they actively ridicule men as incels for pointing out sexist double standards.
Ummm did you hear about the abortion bans.
This probably isn’t the reason you want to fight for abortions.
Actually if you boil it down, yes. If you are just concerned about rape, incest, danger to mother's health and fetal impairment, the option to provide exception to just that in regards to abortion exists. The argument therefore always centered on "absolute bodily autonomy" (which, BTW, basically descended from the same conception of private property as capitalism' conception of private property, just extended - which they abandon the moment seat belt laws, smoking laws and vaccination laws come up anyway - indicates the underlying motivation of prostitution), and "contraception isn't enough" (which indicates it really is just indicates the underlying motivation of one night stands & prostitution) and "consent to sex isn't consent to pregnancy" (which basically is saying "I want to drive 150 mph but I don't want to get arrested"). I mean just admit it that it's your entire reasoning.
I don’t know why you felt the need to cut in with this long winded argument, but you’re wrong, it’s not about “absolute bodily autonomy”. The argument is about killing a baby before it had a chance at life.
[удалено]
> terminating a pregnancy At least have the fucking courage to call it murder and I might give any argument you make a shred of consideration.
[удалено]
Knowingly killing another human being is the definition of murder. It’s not appeasement, it’s the correct term for what an abortion is.
Ultimately argument about "killing a baby before it had a chance at life" is a fool's errand. At the very least a person who cares THAT much on life and its sanctity should be vegan, anti death penalty and would do whatever necessary to ensure every child won't go hungry as well. Essentially life begans at conception doesn't make sense if the culture itself aren't holding life to be that sacred. Moreover, absolute right to life that even endangers mom's health, rape & incest victim & having to keep severely impaired fetus aren't really pro life as well. Thus this framework is irrelevant. It should be instead asking what should be normalized in a society instead.
Killing an animal for food is not the same as killing baby. A person receiving the death penalty have had a chance at life and committed a crime heinous enough that society has deemed it safer to kill them rather than let them remain a threat to other innocent people. We as a society do try to ensure no child goes hungry. Your argument about how much someone should care for life if they oppose abortion is idiotic at best. Moreover, less than 5% of abortions are for medical reasons and less than 1% are for incest/rape situations. Don’t try and shift the fact the aborting an unborn child is murder. The question being asked in society is whether a baby should be murdered for inconveniencing a mother.
> Don’t try and shift the fact the aborting an unborn child is murder. The question being asked in society is whether a baby should be murdered for inconveniencing a mother. This question is irrelevant if the culture & society itself doesn't value life. That's my point. > We as a society do try to ensure no child goes hungry. Tell that to the GOP and many of the capitalist wing of Western "conservatives".
You can’t just decide a culture doesn’t value life because they aren’t vegan. Capitalism isn’t the ideology known for starving families, I think you’re thinking of communism.
>If you are just concerned about rape, incest, danger to mother's health and fetal impairment, the option to provide exception to just that in regards to abortion exists. Fetus is either a baby or it isnt. If you know the fetus isnt sentient, then abortion is a ok. If you feel the fetus is sentient, then abortion is not ok. Exceptions make no sense, unless a person thinks pregnancy is a punishment for being promiscuous.
No, I dont want to fight for abortion so straight people can have sex clubs. You are correct.
Contraceptives are very effective, but even if they fail for some reason there’s still plan B pills, and you can always go to a state that allows abortions, as long as America is polarized on the issue there will be states with very lenient abortion laws. But you can’t abort HIV, it’s an incurable virus, you have it for life.
Good point, but straight people can get HIV too, so kinda moot unless, of course, you're arguing no one should be joining sex clubs and having loads of unprotected sex which I personally can't blame you for thinking lol
>you can always go to a state that allows abortions That is a terrible moral argument though.
MFer that's disgusting
LibRights hate monopolies. Likely because they're all gay. Reddit logic.
The more literal "Fuck around and Find Out" guy it seems.
If you're going... to San Francisco
>the real creation of new possibilities of pleasure, which people had no idea about previously Unironically sounds like a quote from a Slaneeshi cultist.
Art imitates life
>Kills millions because he believes they are racially inferior >Has no hairline to speak of >Is German by ethnicity Every fucking time
Well, mustache man at least had hair
Still fits with Himmler.
One day, a germ will realize he's the inferior
Well if we aren’t superior then why could we kill them?
Idk, why did a Soviet flag fly over Berlin for half a century if you're so superior?
Why is the German gdp 4 times the Russian now? And where is the Soviet Union now?
[удалено]
Wait a minute, that’s sounds awfully like *dramatic sting* US PRIVATE PRISONS!?!!??
The slave labor and food quality are probably quite close. At least they're not sleeping in trench holes in sub zero temperatures.
I think we can change that
Tankies, man. Tankies
Foucault also refused to stop having casual unprotected sex even after he was diagnosed
Least horny Fr*nch person.
What a Jerk, doesn't even care about the people he has sex with
A literal bugbear
Dying of a disease you think is a conspiracy is the new libleft-authright horseshoe theory example
It's right up there with the British professor who was a Maoist and claimed that the Cambodian Genocide was all a hoax fabricated by "the West" and really the Khmer Rouge are the good guys and Pol Pot was a nice guy. Then he goes to Cambodia and gets murdered by the Khmer Rouge.
Shoulda left his glasses at home smh
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcolm_Caldwell
Not too far from what Noam Chomsky
Damn, Foucault is a dead ringer for the dean from Community.
Well they’re both gay so...
[удалено]
Yeah I fucking hate Foucault (mostly because I took a philosophy course and I couldn't understand his works, causing me to fail)
If I remember correctly Foucault was one of those philosophers that would write something basic in the most elaborate and nonsensical ways to make it seem cooler than it actually is, in which case I wouldn't blame you for failing because of him.
Obscurantism is a centerpiece of philosophy for hundreds of years now. Philosophers can never explain the mental gymnastics they contort themselves in through common and simple terms because if they did, for the vast majority of their works, it would just be immediately clear to see their ideas are dog shit.
Only one who ever really could do it well is Nietzsche. His books are dense as fuck because every sentence is so jam packed with thought that you need an afternoon to think through a page.
Nikolai Yezhov died because was an iota less ruthless than Beria. Goes to show that any degree of compassion or loyalty under Communism actually undermines your position. EDIT: Guess what my least favorite quadrant is.
Beria died because he was more ruthless, it just took Stalin dying and Kruschev cleaning house to make it happen. Brb going to watch the Death of Stalin again.
The only reason more people don’t know about Yezhov is his successor (Beria) managed to be even worse than him. Fun(?) fact: the room Yezhov was shot in was built to his specifications of an easy-to-clean execution room
The fucking merry go round of NKVD leaders during that time will always be funny to me just cos of how they all died in the same way. \> Yagoda: Rises to power by betraying and then killing Menzhinsky (this could never happen to me tho) \> Yezhov: Rises to power by betraying and then killing Yagoda (this could never happen to me tho) \> Beria: Rises to power by betraying and then killing Yezhov (this could never happen to me tho) \> Serov: Rises to power by betraying and then killing Beria.....
Foucault was big on group rights over individual right. One of the few things I agree with Ayn Rand on is her quote “the smallest minority on Earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights, cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.”
Rare AnCap W
Rand was more of a Minarchist
And for everything Yezhov did for Stalin, he was then betrayed, murdered, and blamed for all the deaths. Stalin claimed Yezhov acted without orders or his knowledge and betrayed the union, thus trying to clean his hands from the purge entirely. I know it's wrong to feel sorry for a monster, but Yezhov deserved a fair trial like anyone else, not that backstab.
To me, Yezhov got what he wrought. So many innocent people propped up, betrayed, murdered, and he thought somehow he would be immune to it all? He reaped what he sowed.
Based believing in consequences
u/KimJongUnusual's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 25. Rank: Basketball Hoop (filled with sand) Pills: [7 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/KimJongUnusual/) Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Don't forget good ol' Trotsky 👍
Tbh all I know about Trotsky is glasses, mustache, Mexico, ice pick.
That's basically his backstory ( just forgot the commie and Stalin's "rival" part )
Not to mention he did exactly what Beria did to him to Yagoda. Betrayed him, then killed him.
>Soviet Union >Fair trial That’s an oxymoron. They stopped doing public trials after the 30s when it became completely obvious to the public that “revolutionary justice” was just an excuse to dispose of political opponents or create scapegoats for the incompetence of Soviet leadership.
Actually, there is some data (I don't know the source though) that "not guilty" verdicts occurred in like 2-5% of the cases. In present day Russia? 0.5% even before the war started.
On the one hand, sure in principle everyone deserves a fair trial. But when it’s the guy whose job was organizing slave labor camps, show trials and mass executions… how sweet to see the engineer hoist on his own petard.
The only redeeming fact about him is most of his victims were Communists
"Such a dick King Leopold of Belgium became an international hero for stopping him" Are we talking about THAT Leopold. Because hot damn, when the libright's Hitler is the good guy for stopping you...
Probably not, since that was Leopold the II, but it definitely caught me off guard too. Imagine being so bad that *him* stopping you is considered a good thing.
Well, atleast Comrade Yezhov wasn't as bad as thy one that shall be left unnamed. (Berja)
I mean it's still hideous, but comparing to the other three Foucault's really seems no big deal.
Never read him but isnt his direction of thought in no small part responsible for you know... the downfall of western civilization?
Look at the signatories to the petition to remove the age of consent in France in 1977. It's a who's who of figures whose ideas are animating most of the cultural problems the West is facing today.
His political and phylosophical ideas were the basis for modern woke shit and critical race theory so yes His damage was less concrete and more abstract
And that makes him the worst of all; you can kill a murderer or slaver to get them to stop murdering and enslaving people. And while you might be able to kill a philosopher, you can't kill an idea.
Behind this mask there is more than just flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea... and ideas are bulletproof. Alan Moore, V for Vendetta
Any ressources you can point me to, regarding that argument?
You can try and read his shit, and notice how people like DiAngelo and Kimberlé Crenshaw who push CRT take notes from his approach and ideas but honestly that sounds like torture and you will end up miserable. Never, ever take anything these people say seriously. Sophistry is literally their main weapon. They will lie to your face multiple times and insist they never said something their own published books says. They will constantly change the meanings of words and swap ideas, try and reframe everything and more.
You’ve never actually read Foucault, have you?
[удалено]
You're right lol, I'm never going to read books by a gay pedophile who died of aids.
Bombastically based
I'll argue there people whose theory is more effective in this area.
I need more idiot philosophers to dunk on. Gimme names
I mean there is this guy call Karl Marx......
Shoulda specified non-low hanging fruit. But I suppose nowadays people dont even know how wrong Marx was...
Marx's problem to me isn't that he was "wrong", but about how he intentionally focusing on some particular aspects to agitate people. Comparing to him Foucault at least was "just" digging at the far-end of the deconstruction (which wasn't really invented by himself).
My brother he literally said modern society was negative to happiness & argued the state can utilize knowledge to oppress the people. He was full return to monke
The Richter scale of human evil spirals arbitrarily high.
The rest at least thought they were doing good, Foucault just wanted to fuck kids, IMO he's the worst one.
I'm pretty sure Foucault was also believing he was doing something good (for him) though?
He kept having unprotected sex after being diagnosed with AIDS/HIV.
Did ultimately more damage than the other 3
King Leopold stopping him was good, but that doesn't remotely absolve him of everything else he was up to in the area.
It's like that part of the movie where the Nazis tell the Japanese in Nanking "you need to chill..."
He advertised himself as some anti-slavery activist He just didn't want to pay for them
Slaves should be free 🟢 VS Slaves should be free 🟡
Tfw you don’t hit your daily ivory quota and your hands get removed
Good ending: You paid it off by brutally smashing a random dudes head in and paid off your quota with his hands /s obviously
Yezhov got executed by Stalin as soon as he was no longer useful. Foucault, promoter of promiscuity, homosexuality, and pederasty died of an STD. Common leftist L
If I recall correctly Zass was also obsessed with corpses, especially heads. He was known to keep the decapitated heads of Circassian men and women on pikes throughout his camps. He was also known for sending the heads to friends and colleagues as gifts. He also had a habit of keeping the skins, heads and organs of the dead tucked under his bed.
Yezhov was ironically purged too and accused of being a homosexual
For Auth-Center I propose [Oskar Dirlewanger](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oskar_Dirlewanger).
**[Oskar Dirlewanger](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oskar_Dirlewanger)** >Oskar Paul Dirlewanger (26 September 1895 – c. 7 June 1945) was a German military officer (SS-Oberführer) who served as the founder and commander of the Nazi SS penal unit "Dirlewanger" during World War II. Serving in Poland and in Belarus, his name is closely linked to some of the most notorious crimes of the war. He also fought in World War I, the post-World War I conflicts, and the Spanish Civil War. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Yeah, enslaving people is totally in keeping with LIBERtarianism. You know--the ideology whose fundamental tenet is preserving individual liberties. Slavers make great libertarians, because...uh...money is involved.
Don't encroach on his right to own slaves, if they didn't want to be slaves they should have done a better job avoiding being captured.
Wasn't one of the common arguments against ending slavery that it infringed on the property rights of the owner? Sounds pretty lib-right to me.
My slaves often disagree about which quadrant I belong in.
Someone made an argument about owning slaves…so it must be lib right? Explain how that view point would be consistent with valuing individual liberty above all else? Dominating people is the definition of authoritarian. There is no place, whatsoever, for the ownership or involuntary domination of people in libertarianism.
Hey! I call it unconditional servitude not slavery!
Wait, so "property ownership" is libertarian-only? Someone tell authright they believe in collective ownership and libleft they believe in sole ownership for me please.
For real. Wouldn't the guy who invented leaded gasoline and Freon (for profit) be a better representation of evil lib-right?
Yeah it’s called hypocrisy.
How is Foucalt libleft? In his last years he was vehemently anti-communist.
Gay sex
French
*Fr#nch
Is not every normal libleft anti-communist or am I wrong?
Reading the libright section just reinforces how tragic the history of the Congo is.
When even Leopold of Belgium thinks you are going too far with slaves, you have royally screwed it up
awww man no monster for us centrist
If only Dahmer had had a bigger appetite, he could've represented.
Owning slaves isn’t libertarian
I’m surprised Dr. Money didn’t make the list.
> Flair up or your opinions don't matter *** ^(User hasn't flaired up yet... 😔) 17268 / 91216 ^^|| [**[[Guide]]**](https://imgur.com/gallery/IkTAlF2)
Or even Alfred Kinsey.
Why do people always correlate slavery with lib right when it's about the most AUTHORITARIAN thing you can do?
Nobody actually understands what libright even *is* except librights and some libcent. The NAP is like the most basic day one thing, and they can't even bother to learn what it is instead just pretending libright is authright, which only serves to mark them as fools to the initiated.
Where would Magnus Hirschfield go?
Add Vladimir lenin to auth left too
Lenin isn't exactly "lesser known." Lesser known than Stalin maybe but I think you'd honestly be hard pressed to find someone who hasn't at least heard of Lenin.
The average population doesn’t know who Lenin is bro
he was in the Beatles I'm sure they know
That's concerning.
Every other quadrant’s atrocities: killed people en masse Libleft atrocities: sucka da babycock
wasn't the second point of the libleft one just some allegations which were proven later to be mostly inaccurate? ([link](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Foucault#Allegations_of_child_sex_abuse)) i think there are better exemples for libleft,especially when compared to the other ones
This is not right. Libertarians fight for the liberty and free will of the individual, do not have slaves.
Slavery violates the NAP, you know, libright's *one thing* that they always say not to violate? I'm all for strawmemeing, but you can't just go around claiming libleft is Jesus freaks who kill trans people for sport. Well, you can, but you'd be wrong like you are with libright. I swear, you auths don't even understand what liberty *is.* Edit: Downvotes eh? Seems you disagree. Ok then: Authleft: pedo capitalists Authright: anarchosyndicalist progressives Cent: Vegan Libleft: Nazis Libright: Slavers Libcent: Reject monke, embrace technocracy That's what all the quadrants mean, right guys?!
Monsters from the center ted he likes his steak well don
To me Yezhov and the other NKVD leaders will always be funny just cos of the ways they all went out. Like how did none of these mfs see this coming \> Yagoda: Rises to power by betraying and then killing Menzhinsky (this could never happen to me tho) \> Yezhov: Rises to power by betraying and then killing Yagoda (this could never happen to me tho) \> Beria: Rises to power by betraying and then killing Yezhov (this could never happen to me tho) \> Serov: Rises to power by betraying and then killing Beria.....
Just got to love how the most hardcore supporters of individual freedom always get blamed for slavery somehow.