Equality is a sham that you have all fallen for

Every modern person, include you and me, is indoctrinated by a morality that asserts equality as a noble and just cause. Equality is inherently paradoxical in complex systems.

Very simply:

Attached: 23423789423.png (924x900, 120.08K)

Other urls found in this thread:


really good stuff in the leftmost part of this image on equality.

I probably should have used "fallacy" instead of "paradox"

Also, I believe that equality is only a fallacy in the context of correcting privilege in greater society, not in every context obviously.

Attached: Alexander_the_Great_mosaic.jpg (2560x1536, 1.54M)

speaking to the choir here, chief

ah, so close

fuck me, board is slow these days

Attached: 65755d013bc3242ad97636825c957bbc5f669f8011a576142bb63c4ecfd3386c.jpg (400x353, 20.85K)

excellent quad7's checked joey m8


you know for some reason i just cant read pink text. redo it in green.

It has literally always been for cross-board posting only. There's no need to lie to protect yourself from negative perception. You're anonymous.

Attached: 2138921.png (1632x1244, 105.64K)

Reminder were doomed to endlessly discuss cuckchan tier posts about entry level redpills for normies now thanks to the "politics discussion" nu/pol/ motto.

Attached: tumor.jpg (400x300, 19.37K)

I would bet money you didn't read or understand what I posted but have somehow managed to think it "looks smart" therefore probably supports your per-conceived beliefs and now you want to be superior by posting your /r/the_donald-tier "ha, we already knew this" bullshit.

I would also bet money that if I made the subject "national socialism is an inherently flawed ideology" and everything else the same you would not be posting "we already knew this" and instead "fuck off, kike shill".

Subhuman, low IQ retards like you shall be massacred one day. We will kill your children.


your conclusion is correct, but attempting to simplify a complex societal problem such as the pursuit of (((equality))) down to this level is unrealistic and useless; in fact such reductionism is commonly used by liberals to push their retardation even though the real world doesn't follow their limited understanding.

Explain some complexity you could add that would invalidate my argument.

The difference is, that it is not

your pseudo-intellectual bullshitting using le fancy le greek le algebra symbols doesn't change the fact that everything you've said is very obvious and is commonly known amongst Zig Forums users.

if you tried to argue that you would be wrong though
opinions discarded

look at my post and try again

Explain some complexity you could add that would invalidate my argument.

All men are created equal (in height) i.e. no more giants, but hey thanks for sharing your crusade against morality you degenerate faggot.

Equality under the law is the only real equality.

lol, maybe in 1989 when I was 7.

1993, I woke up.

What is the point of this thread? Nothing is equal. If you didn't know that, you're a newfag. You wouldn't even be able to tell two things apart if they were truly "equal."

Because every single popular political system, from communist to democratic republic to national socialism relies on moralizing equality between people at some level and this is a critique of that.

Are you suicidal?

I can't see any at this point. However, that is irrelevant because I never said there were any.
The outcome of your argument is something which everyone here knows.
The method by which you arrived at that outcome is not a reliable method of reasoning about complex systems such as society.
Therefore, your thread is useless.
Just lurk moar and don't try to pretend that you're really smart because you looked up some fancy greek symbols in the character map.

Of course, "equality" does not exist. double-digit-IQ people simply confuse "equality under the law" with "equality of outcomes."
There are people born smarter than others, there are people born wealthier and better-connected than others, there are people stronger and healthier than others, and some people are born prettier than others…that's just the way the universe is.

But all people should be judged by the law in the same manner, and all crimes should be punished equally. That is an achievable goal.
The guy that breaks into a home and steals should be punished to the same degree that a guy who breaks into a bank account and steals is. And they both should be in the same prisons, and treated the same way. And both should be tried under the same laws.

Our biggest problem is that we have lost sight of this basic requirement. Some people are allowed a pass (Hillary Clinton) even though they have done the same things (or worse) that others were fined and imprisoned for.
THAT is true inequality under the law, and THAT needs to change.

As for everything else being unequal, welcome to reality, the universe does not function based on anyone's expectation of "fair" so just get used to it, and do the best you can.
Human laws cannot govern the physical universe, period.

Attached: Woilfman.jpg (1000x540, 58.3K)

These kinds of threads are good for times when we get an influx of refugees from cuckchan or wherever all these boomers are coming from.

Can you elaborate a bit more? For example, a criminal is a person, yet they are judged differently by the law. A woman is a person, but they should also be judged differently by the law (they should not be able to vote, etc.). A nigger is a "person", but they were and should be judged differently by the law (not allowed to mix with Whites, etc.).

As I said, none should be judged differently, period. The term "white collar crime" should have never existed. Theft is theft, and if it is to be adjudicated differently, then the only cases I can see where it matters is "was violence involved?" or "how much was stolen?"

The statement I agree with most in the OP is;

This is undeniable.
But I disagree with him entirely in his assessment of "monarchies" and the passing along of wealth without taxation (which is what I think I'm reading here). To me, all income, regardless of source, put in the pockets of any individual, should all be taxed under the same system, with businesses and corporations not taxed at all (they are nebulous creations of paper, they are not people).

As for treating people unequally under the law, I'm against it. I know we make exceptions for the mentally ill or disabled, but have you noticed how much that is abused? Better to just keep everything equal, regardless of such extenuating circumstances, it avoids many problems.

Attached: WolfPup.jpg (500x500, 44.04K)

The totality of the entire system is balanced, equal. Complex/simple, generational, inequity…to who, or what? Rationalization for how? You, nor humans and their decendents are even a brief ripple in this spacetime. Watch your cycle net zero.

Logic, as it is fundamentally taught, consists of starting with some true premises and building off of them. The reductionism in my argument seeks to argue against the FUNDAMENTAL LOGIC behind social systems of privilege-correction. If you can disprove an assertion in a chain of assertions at the very early level then you can invalidate any conclusions drawn from further assertions. This is how formal logic works.

If you had a slither of a brain you would make an argument like "National Socialism isn't actually a system of privilege-correction as a moral good. A logical Nazi state uses a non-conventional morality that does not claim equality is a moral good. There is no moral value attached to equality except where that equality encourages stability which allows the nation to strive towards it's ultimate goal."

I never said equality does not exist and I explicitly made the case against both equality of law and equality of outcomes, hence why I think my perspective is unique enough to be worthy of a thread and not a comment on some Sargon video.

The point I was making was that arguing for equality from a moral perspective is irrational because there is no point where you can simply start tracking equality. The best analogy I can think of for nature is a relay race. A privilege-correcting system is one where the instant the runners pass the baton, they stop until everyone has caught up then start running. How is this fair to the previous runners who worked harder? They get nothing for their effort and the system may completely discourage them from even bothering to try harder if they know the outcome will be the same. At the end of the race, is it unfair if the final runner had a few seconds head-start? Only if you compare the last segment of the race.

And there is nothing wrong with that. Otherwise there is no rule of laws at all, dumb dumb.


On an unrelated note:

This is why intellectualism and "philosophers" have always been NEETs, even when dukes and kings cared for them.
Time for blood is nigh.

Fuck off retard. You are worse than OP.

It's not difficult to imagine many societies where the law discriminates against different peoples.


That's like saying a country is doing well because its GNP is high.
If all the wealth from that GNP is in the hands of only 10% of the population, and 90% of the population is close to starving, you can't really say the country is "doing well" even though the overall production might look good.

Your method of argumentation is unnecessary and not useful for convincing people that the pursuit of equality isn't useful. A much more concise argument could be "Equality of outcome is bad because it means that people with high capabilities will get dragged down to the level of those with low capabilities. Equality of opportunity is also undesirable because it means that people who have ancestors with desirable traits will not have the advantage that would usually bring." I'm sure I could have worded that better, but you get the idea.
Everybody knows this already. Do you want to be spoken to be like a retard? Oh and by the way 1+1 is actually 2.
It's really not.



Good job OP. You've made it. Equality is inherently invalid because it's not working in the real world. This is our "Blank Slate Hypothesis", IE the idea that all men are created equal.

Now apply this to all ideologies you've heard of and think of which ones have this idea at their core, or fail to function if this idea is not true.
Right there you've eliminated the mainstream political spectrum. A fun question to ask leftrists/centrists: Why is equality good? Have them justify it.

Now think of which ideologies are not dependent upon this assertion.

Thus you have the three classical ideologies of Zig Forums.
You know why your ideas make sense, rather than raw intuition. Congratulations.

Attached: 1458838405998.jpg (1920x1080, 41.47K)


Obviously you don't argue it with insincere opposition who won't entertain an actual argument. It's a great line to use on Big Brain Nibbas though, who take their ideas super seriously yet have never had to ask that question of themselves. It's a great slayer of Classical Liberals IMHO and communists have to submit a 20-page essay to explain equality being good if you don't accept tabula rasa.

As a matter of fact, we've done this for pretty much every historic civilization. Just think of any time period and the most advanced society of that time and you'll find massive economic disparity. The modern age is an exception to such massive economic disparity even though the top 1% are so much wealthier than the average citizen.

Real life contradicts your point though. Compare the bottom 90% of blacks in the Congo or South Africa during white rule to blacks in other parts of Africa that were not under strict white rule. The blacks were migrating in massive numbers to white-owned lands where they were discriminated against because being the bottom of a successful society gave them better lives than being medium-high status in a terrible society.

Are you serious? Read that again. The disparity exists and society tries to correct it. This either means by making δ = ε = 1.0 or δ = ε = 0.7 or δ = ε = 0.85 or whatever.

Whenever this argument comes up I present natural reality. Intelligence obviously exists and is genetic. Intelligence is one trait that is most highly correlated with success. Is the solution to this to engineer people to all be equally capable or to modify society so that intelligent people have just as much chance of success as stupid people?

The solution is to let stupid people simply fail at life, like they were naturally inclined to do.

You have the equation

δ * 0.70 = ε

which is rather retarded in itself since working with non-normalized things are in general very stupid. But if you now set δ = ε the equation doesn't make sense except for the trivial case.

Exactly. Either way is terrible answer and self-evidently terrible to all Big Brain Nibbas. So they either refuse to answer, in which case you call them out for being dishonest, or realize that equality, and thus the central premise of their entire political system, is wrong.

Don't just let them, user. Darwin enlightened us to what causes stupid people. Stop them from reproducing and taking up resources.

I remember the Aztecs have an absolute system of equality where even the emperor wasn't allowed to inherit the lands of the previous emperor and they would mummify then dress up the mummy like it was still alive and have a committee roleplay what the previous emperors would do if the emperor was still alive. He would continue ruling his domain even in his death and the new emperor had to start subjugating other lands to even have get an tax income going.

Free will isn't real the cultural differences reflect the differences in the parents. Children are artificially intelligent and mirror their parents to become like them.

Once you accept the reality of RACE, all the ideas that stem from the concept equality are absouletly destroyed.

"Equality under the law" is fallacy that was weapon of oppressed classes against their oppressors.

As you said
Example. For "normal" person imprisonment is much stronger punishment, destroying their way of life. For carrier criminal ? Just part of the routine.


I love the way you formatted it.

"Equality at some level"
Functional society requires a DEGREE of equality.
Equal justice under the law is the most important.
A healthy degree of meritocracy is also important (which is a form of "equal opportunity").
There is a huge difference between equality under the law and ACTUALLY being "the same."
People are not "the same."

Equal justice and equality under the law is generally good. We also do not have it. "Elites" get away with crimes all the time. Megabanks and corporations get away with "trading practices" that make them trillions of dollars when if "normal people" did similar practices with microscopic amounts of money they go to jail. (Insider trading is one example.)
Just a few weeks ago they FBI cleared everyone in the whole clinton email bullshit, despite clear wrongdoing. There is no justice anymore.

On the other hand, "literal equality" is a lie. It is a sham.

There are always exceptions. In a good society those exceptions exist to help the Volk and improve the strength and well being of the Nation.
In a bad society they exist to enslave the masses and protect the kikes and "elites."
In the case of non-Whites, they should all be deported and thus become a moot point.
In the case of criminals they actually aren't treated differently. How so? Because the laws governing criminals are already there for everyone else, they are just dormant as long as they commit no crimes. They are already part of the social contract that is applied equally to all.
In the case of police they must have certain protections in order to be able to perform their duties effectively.
In the case of women, they are clearly very different from men. How that should be handled exactly, I don't know.
It is all a balancing act.
As with all things.

This is one reason why excess wealth MUST BE TAXED.
Many will respond with "muh freedums," I suspect because they fantasize about being mega rich despite being poor their whole lives.
When I say excess wealth I mean BIG MONEY as in a hundred of millions of dollars or more.
Less than that and they can be a healthy part of the economy, but the billionaires and the trillionaires (rothschilds, sassoons, etc) are civilization wreckers.
Very large corporations are also a problem. Trustbusting.
Bubble up economics is how to have prosperity for the masses. Oligarchic despotism of megarich families and megacorporations is how to get 1984.

"Equality of outcome" IS bad like you say.
But people should have a reasonable degree of equal opportunity. Oligarchy leads to despotism. Always.

You are misrepresenting "all men are created equal."
It meant that men should be judged by MERIT rather than by what family they were born into.
It did not mean that "all men ARE equal" because that is objectively false.

The solution is to become a White nation again, then institute NatSoc economics for the good of the Volk, and then utilize eugenics to improve everyone until ALL are high quality. Seems like a better dream of the future than any other.

I have also read about that.

It is not a perfect system, but it is better than any other.
The solution is to have reasonable and just laws that no "normal" person would even consider breaking (fewer and more specific laws than now).
Yes, going to prison is terrible for a "normal person," but a "normal person" should not be breaking the law.
The fact that it is terrible is kind of the point. But, again, the laws must be just and reasonable.

Most things are a balancing act.
The question is finding the right balance.
And also deciding what the right balance is.
That is where economics and social policy transforms into philosophy, I suppose.

I always argued that justice should not be equal for all, why should we judge the Clintons equally from the average person?
We know they have resources to cheat their way out of prison, even if we manage to imprison them they'll probably be living like kings in there.
an example from a shit-tier country

Why are you making threads about shit everybody knows? Are you going to tell me Hitler didn't want to take over the world next?

bretty good

Your basic premise here is that there is any logic to be found among the entire argument of (((equality))). Leftist retards regularly flout the use of logic to promote their talking points, and when shouted down using actual sound logic and statistics, they refuse to address it and instead point at is as "proof" that the system is inherently broken and must be torn down so that it can be rebuilt from the ground up in a way DESIGNED to support the "oppressed".

If the gender wage gap was real, greedy corporations would hire nobody but women because they can pay them 23% less than they pay men for the same amount of work. If toxic masculinity and depictions of "strong women" in media was real, then Metroid and Alien would never have become iconic media properties spawning numerous sequels, spinoffs, and references because "men feel uncomfortable seeing a strong woman on the screen."

For fuck's sake, if ANYTHING that leftists say is even remotely true, then it's only begun to exist in the last decade or so, when Progressive™ propaganda began to kick into high gear and started changing the way the public considered these "problems". It means that leftists and feminists CREATED these problems that did not previously exist solely to allow them to complain about how problematic everything is; confronting a leftist over the logical fallacies that live in every pore of Progressive™ thought does nothing but agitate the cognitive dissonance they live with every day, because emotions rule over them instead of any semblance of logic.

You aren't convincing anybody here with your logic. We already know shit is broken and privilege is a joke, and "correcting privilege" is simply affirmative action rebranded into something more politically correct. Point out the hypocrisy they commit to on a daily basis, such as complaining about harassment on Twitter when they simultaneously actively harass and threaten women and children for being on the "wrong side of history", or how they demand that everybody give up everything they care about because someone they don't know that's actually an active detriment to society begged for scraps or demanded capitulation.


This is one reason why excess wealth MUST BE TAXED.

Many will respond with "muh freedums," I suspect because they fantasize about being mega rich despite being poor their whole lives.

When I say excess wealth I mean BIG MONEY as in a hundred of millions of dollars or more.
If in 3-4 generations your great grandchildren each own the equivalent wealth of what today is 100 million US dollars then why would they be robbed of it just because much of it was built on the wealth the previous generations bequeathed to them?


Which great philosopher and father of western civilisation said that the worst inequality is to make unequal things equal again?

This thread is like when a Stormfronter discovers this place for the first time and proceeds to post "THE MANTRA", thinking that he's going to red pill us with a startling new concept called "white genocide."
Lurk 2 years prior to posting, because you clearly have a gross misunderstanding of the community you're attempting to "educate".