Does /it/ like John Locke?

>Does /lit/ like crypto-semitic purveyors of anti-white religious thought wrapped in the pseudo-secular garments of liberalism and the Enlightenment?
No.

>>9084894
>crypto-semitic
How?

File: 296025429.png (398KB, 719x373px) Image search: [Google]

398KB, 719x373px

>>9084894

>>9084885
>does /lit/ like a guy who unironically believed in """human rights"""
no

>>9084898
>Anti-white
>Liberal
>Anti-christian
>Not a Jew
Uh durr I'm you and I'm fucking retarded

>>9084932
Why are they wrong?

>>9084959
Human rights are unironically a spook

>>9084959
They don't exist. Think about it for 30 seconds and the truth of my words should be self-evident. I'd rather not spoonfeed you this.

>>9084974
>>9084978
So you rayher live in a barbaric world?

>>9084885
Yes, essential reading for anyone living in an anti-democratic european country.

>>9084992
We already do.

>>9085001
Really tingles my brain cells........

>>9084959
you don't belong here, nigger

>>9085001
USA?

>>9084992
I can fathom that you're out of your depth.

read Politics as a Vocation, Of the Social Contract, Apology, and Crito. You'll be off to a good start.

>English
>philosopher
Pick one

File: mq4bf4c.png (846KB, 900x550px) Image search: [Google]

846KB, 900x550px

>>9084992

It doesn't matter what I rather. Human rights only exist insofar as an entity with the power to enforce them exists.

Locke's problem was he was too stupid to be born after Weber, so he didn't realize that governments generate rights through their monopoly on violence, thus you can hardly have a right to overthrow your government.

>>9085071
Forgot to mention that if rights are generated by said entity then said entity can change or take them away at will, hence rights are a spook. Euthyphro dilemma and all that.

>>9084885
Yeah dude he was my favorite character, too bad he died.

File: durn to yah.jpg (70KB, 396x594px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 396x594px

>>9084885
hell yeah

>>9084959
Humanity isn't a legitimate concept and shouldn't be the basis on which rights are decided.

>>9085071
>>9085077
I like your posts and agree with you but I do think you're a bit hasty to implicate the right of revolution. I'm not well read on the subject (yet) but I believe it's a distinct issue. Ironically I think Locke was onto something when he said that a state which defeats its purpose by resubjecting citizens to a state of nature/war can be rebelled against, for it has broken the social contract.

I'm a Christian and kind of unironically believe in the Divine Right of Kings, so I take this a bit differently. If the State intentionally subverts God's purposes, it is the duty of Christians to rebel. Antigone is my intellectual forerunner in this regard.

>>9085116
>legitimate
>concept

These things are not what they are and therefore should not be the basis for any further thoughts or ideas.

>>9084885
This guy working at the library nearby looks like him baka.

File: 10009300_563441637099653_5530694319548916653_n.jpg (13KB, 376x302px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 376x302px

>>9084945
I hope this is ironic because I'm pissing myself at this post

Isn't that the dude from lost?

i prefer josef locke tbph
secondary source:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxX6z7R9PSw

>>9085127
>Locke was onto something when he said that a state which defeats its purpose by resubjecting citizens to a state of nature/war can be rebelled against
This, if the people in charge are shit, remove them, enough with bullying Locke