Well, average life expectancy is about twice what it was beforehand, the proportion of society that can read has gone up by at least 5 times, and I can shitpost on 4chan instead of subsistence farming.
>>514232 Probably a good thing in terms of overall human development, though it exacerbated existing class disparities to an extreme degree. That's more an issue with the capitalist system that feeds off industrialism though rather than industrialism itself. Same reason as to why the environmental damages of certain industries is swept under the rug: it's inconvenient to address when attempting to maximize profits for the personal gains of a minority class.
The only bad thing about it is you sorta have to start a family today. Due almost no relatives and only 2-3 children per family. There was greater opportunity to lone of the extended family before, with 6-9 children power generation(even if most of them died)
i don't know, maybe you can't say degeneracy killed a state. but innumerable states can and have been affected by degeneracy. the natural state of humans is depraved as fuark, you need strong rulership and discipline to counter-act it. when the people have strong morals and a tough, no-bullshit leader, they can stay clear from degeneracy.
>>514359 >A good king would never torture or kill his subjects unjustly. Except most "good" kings that are historically revered readily killed and tortured purely to enforce fear of their rule. That's pretty standard practice in fact: a king needs the violent coercion to maintain power. "Divine right" doesn't really cut it anymore, and the singular, ultra-centralized position ensures that no man could be a representative of the people in that seat enough to be considered a consistent popular leader.
>degeneracy has never killed a major state. >big kek Please, do point to objective cases were "degeneracy" was the sole cause of a state's collapse. Define for me what "degeneracy" is, and try not implying that your very much modern distastes have any actual weight on historical reality.
>>514514 But what does that MEAN in terms of human behavior. Because for the most part, it seems to be used here as "things I don't like, thus must be the root of all societal ills." Tell me, what are things that are OBJECTIVELY degenerate? Can you provide evidence that they have ever been the sole cause of ANY societal crisis or collapse without willfully ignoring other cultural, material, or truly measurable explanations?
>>514540 It's not that they "don't like" it. The things /pol/ dislikes are objectively degenerate. Because yes, I know this will boggle your tiny brain brainwashed since birth by marxist propaganda, but objectivity exists. Some ideas can objectively be classified as degenerate.
>>514557 >Tell me, what are things that are OBJECTIVELY degenerate? Easy.
Massive foreign immigration is objectively degenerate because it saps the foundation of the state and eventually leads to collapse.
The loosening of sexual mores is objectively degenerate because it leads to falling birthrates, hedonism and a subsequent decline of population. This then leads to leaders allowing massive foreign immigration.
Unpopular opinion: There were always degenerates. You had degenerates in Roman times, Medieval times, Modern times and so on.
Degeneracy is mostly due to ignorance, in my opinion.
People think happiness is physical pleasure and that a good life is one with a lot of physical pleasure. Mostly because they didn't read Plato's and Xenophon's Socratic works, Aristotle, the Stoics and so on. So, they become weak, pleasure seekers.
If people were taught that virtue leads to fulfillment, you wouldn't have many people thinking this creature is a hero:
>>514572 So that makes them degenerate Is what typicallyfollows after, and not in the actual act itself?
I guess that means we should stop all people from ever breeding, clearing farmland, and/or having electricity, because those things help destroy the earth and the excess population causes war and strife to occur, as well as leading to resource competition. Because those things are "objectively" the cause of societal collapse.
>>514572 >Massive foreign immigration is objectively degenerate because it saps the foundation of the state and eventually leads to collapse That of course suggesting that the state is an absolute, objectively good entity. It also implies that all modern states are based on some objective quality of its people rather than a result of political circumstance in the wake of 19th and 20th century nationalism. You could have mass migration from Austria to Germany and you probably wouldn't be much of an issue despite being, as you said, massive foreign immigration.
>The loosening of sexual mores is objectively degenerate because it leads to falling birthrates, hedonism and a subsequent decline of population. This then leads to leaders allowing massive foreign immigration. Falling birthrates isn't even a terrible thing if the current population suits societal needs. Let's be honest here: you take issue that there are less white children being born. Hedonism is likewise a subjective term. It describes no observable human condition and is applied entirely based on relative stance and personal understanding. Neither of these are necessarily even related to each other or to "sexual promiscuity," but rather to the material circumstances of the developed world where labor is low-valued and it becomes most advantageous to rear smaller numbers of children than more (quality over quantity). This does not result in a need for immigration: immigration was going to happen anyways so long as there financial incentive to do so to attain workers for lower wages. You're talking about systemic issues and diverting the attention towards individuals who have no power in the matter as though their individual behavior is the deciding point. Their behavior means nothing because we live in a system where the individual means nothing.
>>514232 started out good. slowly became a system of enslavement.
now technology is used to enslave instead of liberate. the lie of progress is made apparent when you consider the destruction of the enviroment, the rampant mental illness, rising suicide rates, DNA damage from gentoxins that extends for generations, the consolidation of technology and thus power by the globally wealthy, things too numerous to mention.
the general direction of this civlization is towards implosion, not progress. people cannot see this because they think progress is either an economic system or illogical political fuckery such as identity politics.
they are willfully ignorant of the brokenness around them, and that's exactly why things are not getting better. i've spoken to people, and many of them just want a small plot of land to grow their own food and build a home, clean water, and a family. that isn't much to ask for, yet it is exceedingly difficult to obtain when you're in the system
>>514610 >how is immigration bad? Because immigrants are foreigners and eventually destroy the host country.
>>514693 >So that makes them degenerate Is what typicallyfollows after, and not in the actual act itself? No, what I call degeneracy are the acts which lead to collapse.
>I guess that means we should stop all people from ever breeding, clearing farmland, and/or having electricity, because those things help destroy the earth I'm not talking about the earth you fucking idiot. I'm talking about society. Jesus Christ grow a brain.
>Because those things are "objectively" the cause of societal collapse. Agriculture causes societal collapse? Are you a nigger?
>>514700 >You could have mass migration from Austria to Germany and you probably wouldn't be much of an issue despite being, as you said, massive foreign immigration. Germans and Austrians aren't as foreign as muslims and blacks. That is the crux of the issue.
A morrocan won't have much trouble immigrating to Tunisia either.
>Falling birthrates isn't even a terrible thing if the current population suits societal needs It is because a state cannot sustain itself with a declining population.
>Let's be honest here: you take issue that there are less white children being born. I'm not white, I'm of japanese origin. Keep your racist assumptions to yourself.
>Hedonism is likewise a subjective term. No it's not. Read a fucking book other than Adorno.
>>514592 Wasn't really relevant to the discussion, but here we go. Hold on to your angus:
>people becoming unhealthy is degenerate That implies that all health-related issues are entirely within one's control, and that an individual's health concerns should be entirely the responsibility of that individual. It entirely ignores the conditions for why people become unhealthy in the first place: overworking leaving them with little time to exercise, low income leaving health food options off the table, poor benefits meaning that preventive health measures cannot be taken, thus emerging health problems cannot be addressed until they become life-threatening and increasingly resource-costly to treat.
>people's birth rates drop is degenerate This is a phenomenon that has only emerged within the last century or so. If the needs of the society are met with the number of people already present and there is no desire among the populace to increase reproduction, then there is no issue.
>having your men and women become so repulsive to the opposite sex is degenerate That's a personal choice, and has little weight on the society as a whole. Just because you don't like the way someone looks does not mean that they are the cancer killing society: it just means you're not going to pursue romantic or sexual interactions. The world is a diverse place; even the most sexually-frustrated, uptight, straight edge person can find someone with similar ideals. There's no need do force those individual ideals onto others.
>having your young adults still dependent on their parents is degenerate A bit of correlation not being causation here. Young adults being dependent on their parents longer is largely result of a job market issues and other barriers that I'm sure I'm sure you've heard enough about to not have to go at length about. It's a sign of a larger systemic issue, not itself being the cause of systemic dysfunction.
>>514592 >having homosexuals spread aids like wildfire is degenerate While tragic that the AIDs pandemic got it's start in the gay community in the West, they are not the cause of the disease. Things like bugchasers are exaggerated heavily, and the lack of education on protection and prevention of the disease's spread only exacerbates the issue. Additionally, from a pragmatic standpoint, using this as an excuse to persecute gays is not going to solve anything: pandora's box is open and is ripping through all demographics of the world population.
>having drug culture is degenerate because it fucks productivity and health and chances to reproduce or take proper care of kids Drug culture largely exists as a byproduct of the prohibition. It exists as a counterculture that lacks the outlets for education as to the specific detriments of drug use, potentially what moderate use can look like (ie. social alcohol consumption), and lacks the medical support to treat addiction in cases where it does occur.
>>514784 >That implies that all health-related issues are entirely within one's control, Well yes they are. Nobody forces you to shove burgers down your throat every single day.
>low income leaving health food options off the table, Untrue. This is what I call a "liberal myth"
>This is a phenomenon that has only emerged within the last century or so. Once again, untrue. It happened in Ancient Greece. It happened in Rome. It happened in the Caliphate. The common denominator? It happened during their phase of decadence.
To quote the greek historian Polybius (who wrote this as the first roman legions were threatening Greece) :
>"In our time all Greece was visited by a dearth of children and generally a decay of population, owing to which the cities were denuded of inhabitants, and a failure of productiveness resulted, though there were no long-continued wars or serious pestilences among us…. For this evil grew upon us rapidly, and without attracting attention, by our men becoming perverted to a passion for show and money and the pleasures of an idle life, and accordingly either not marrying at all, or, if they did marry, refusing to rear the children that were born, or at most one or two out of a great number, for the sake of leaving them well off or bringing them up in extravagant luxury."
I'm not going to bother responding to the rest of your post. It's late where I live and you're quite obviously a braindead moron who won't have his opinion swayed. All I can recommend is that you read any book written before the 1960s.
>>514823 HOL UP >While tragic that the AIDs pandemic got it's start in the gay community in the West, they are not the cause of the disease. They are literally the cause of the disease in the west. It got introduced by a gay air steward who liked to go to africa and get sodomized by big black dicks, then go to san francisco and sodomize little white bois.
>>514771 >I'm not talking about the earth you fucking idiot. I'm talking about society. Jesus Christ grow a brain. Except humans need the earth to survive idiot. Likewise, you can't have civilization if the earth is total shit >agriculture causes societal collapse Some might argue overeliance on agriculture for food has caused more deaths than anything else in history >Are you a nigger Aaaand ad hominem. Just when I think you had a half decent arguement
>>514860 Also >I'm only talking about society And what I'm saying is society relies on things like stable populations on top of a favorable environment to survive, yet this is somehow irrelevant compared to muh sexual morals
>>514828 >Nobody forces you to shove burgers down your throat every single day. No, but when you don't have many other cost-effective options, you eat what you can afford.
>Untrue. This is what I call a "liberal myth" For the relation between eating habits and poverty: http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/1/6.full For relation between exercise habits and poverty: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3198075/
>Once again, untrue. It happened in Ancient Greece. It happened in Rome. It happened in the Caliphate. The common denominator? It happened during their phase of decadence. Again, I think you mistake correlation with causation. Less children being born usually is a sign that the material conditions of the society had improved to a point where there was less need for increasing population. Hell, when it came to places like Rome, less population growth, especially among the citizens, would have been to their benefit in that it would have meant lesser need for expansionist policies to continue funding increasing population and public services. And don't give me crap about "muh pure ROMAN legions," because those were dead long before the population decline began. Additionally, there's a new factor today as to why people often have less children. Historically, you had many children because they were to act as caretakers for their parents when they grew old. With more robust social security and other social safetynets, there's less incentive to have children for such economic purposes.
>They are literally the cause of the disease in the west. The disease started in deeper parts of Africa early in the 20th century. There have been cases of AIDs popping up in many places around the world prior to "patient zero." While he certainly did a lot to expedite the spread of the virus in the US, he was not the sole cause: he was just the catalyst that caused enough cases that we had to look at all the disease cases and realize there was a common cause.
>>514833 >Nobody talked about persecuting gays you fucking idiot Then what's the point of labeling gays as "degenerate" then? Is the point is to hold a hugely diverse group of people accountable for the mismanagement of a few simply on shared sexual preference?
>Drug culture largely exists as a byproduct of the prohibition Nobody made a big deal about cannabis before it was made illegal: it was no different than tobacco or alcohol. It was used all around the world by all walks of life. Now it's illegal, and potheads are all over the place because it's become countercultural to indulge in that drug's use.
>This is my last post. Good. Back to >>>/pol/ with you.
People like this are the one constant of human civilization. As far back as we have written records we have people bitching about how retarded the current generation is and how things were so much better in the past, usually along with some sinister warnings of civilizational collapse
an argument on 4chins is not going to end a trope that is literally as old as society
>Degeneracy is mostly due to ignorance, in my opinion.
>People think happiness is physical pleasure and that a good life is one with a lot of physical pleasure. Mostly because they didn't read Plato's and Xenophon's Socratic works, Aristotle, the Stoics and so on. So, they become weak, pleasure seekers.
>>514232 nothing has changed in the last 1000 years for the europeans. the modern europe is just feudalism in a different. the main difference is that before the feudal could not have total control over the people living in the rural areas and the forest and mountain area. with the coming of capitalism and its centralized currency, now a greater percentage of people are enslaved than ever before under feudalism. even people living in rural areas and forests and mountains are not immune from the effects of this disease.
the only thing that has changed is for areas outside of europe that ever had a feudal tradition. like the much of the middle east, but most importantly afghanisttan and pakistan reagions.
there are people in this thread that kings kill and in slavery to money you will just loose everything you own. this is not a sign of things getting better. people who are free have to be killed but people who are already in chains are only punished for their infractions. when the masters of money do not like the actions of someone, all tey have to do is to make it very difficult for that person to earn a good living and they have neutralized the threat from this person. in the past the kings had to kill people to accomplish that. in other words in the past people were much more free than they are now.
People who genuinely care about the environment or poor working conditions do so for higher moral reasons which means they also see the good that science brings. They do not conclude that everything must be torn down, which would be the reaction of someone trying to be edgy or having a hissy fit.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.