Fellas, is it bourgeois to exist?

Posting mode: Reply [Return]
Name
Email
Subject	Spoiler Image
Comment
Captcha Tor Only
Flag
File
Embed
Password	(For file deletion.)

>>

Anonymous 2021-07-30 (Fri) 14:56:03 No.119454

Generally no. Not until you have a child and own their means of production.

>>

Anonymous 2021-07-30 (Fri) 14:57:47 No.119455

it's counterrevolutionary to die

>>

Anonymous 2021-07-30 (Fri) 15:05:58 No.119463

By existing, you are consenting to suffering which is a slave mindset. So technically existing is to some extent reactionary. The most revolutionary thing you can do is dying and cucking your enemies out of the chance to torment you. You are eternally free and death is the only place society can truly never reach you and that is honestly comforting.

>>

Anonymous 2021-07-30 (Fri) 15:07:04 No.119464

>>119463
Not convincing
It is not bourgeois to exist

MYTH = DEBUNKED

>>

Anonymous 2021-07-30 (Fri) 15:07:11 No.119465

Since you are your own property, you own property and are therefore bourgeois so yes

>>

Anonymous 2021-07-30 (Fri) 15:10:10 No.119472

File: 1627657810113.png ( 93.03 KB , 600x507 , 158.png )

>>119465

>>

Anonymous 2021-07-30 (Fri) 19:44:29 No.119716

File: 1627674269430.jpg ( 8.59 KB , 250x298 , Mitchell Heisman.jpg )

>>119435
>From a strictly physical standpoint, however, survival cannot be judged better than extinction. "Survivalism" survives, however, because the ancestors of survivors survived. It is a classic bias of living organisms, whether it is rationalized or not. That the bioinconsistent organization of an organism does not completely fall into a reductionistic collapse (consistency with its environment) may be the definition of its survival.

>Equality would seem to implicate an ultimate trajectory of evolutionary "regression" because equal rights imply the beginning of the end of Darwinian selection. A genuine, progressive implementation of universal equal rights implies the artificial end of natural selection; the systematic unraveling of the mechanism that made the evolution of life possible in the first place. The principle of equality can thus be look at as the principle of the elimination of selection.

>The idea of "natural right" is pre-Darwinian. It is thus not especially surprising that the "progress" of the modern idea of the individual right to life leads in precisely the opposite direction as the "progress" of natural selection. The egalitarian elimination of selection is directly tied to the modern notion of leftward "progress" precisely because the gradual accumulation of selections that built life up suggests an equally gradual elimination of selections to unravel life down. The opposite of the modern idea of individual rights is the right of the stronger. Individual rights tend to defend the weaker, while natural selection tends to eliminate the weaker. From some points of view, then, equal rights can be looked upon as the "progress" of genetic adaptation.

>>

Anonymous 2021-07-30 (Fri) 19:47:36 No.119722

Yes. We live in a bourgeois society, so anything in it has bourgeois character. This doesn't mean we can't struggle against it, but it's part of us just as we are part of it. Instead of looking at bourgeois character as some kind of moral taint, understand that it's simply a condition of present existence.

>>

Anonymous 2021-07-30 (Fri) 22:24:49 No.119872

>>119716
I fucking hate Malthusian pseud shit like this.