Liberal Ideology Studies Anonymous 27-09-25 16:53:08 No. 25164
Holy shit if you actually read these guys they're straight-up ancaps and fascists. They're all small-government nationalists obsessed with life, liberty and private property. They already do the whole Schmittian state of exception thing with the state of war. And they're okay with slavery as long as its against the ignorant or its a state of war. Basically, the worst kind of dark satanic mill shit. Like Mill wants to freely sell alcohol and then put drunkards in labor camps. Nietzsche and nihilism are irrelevant, the fascists are straight-up copies of Locke and Mill. And to be honest, the Liberals do that really long-winded and dull prose that fascists do as well.
- "Two Treatises of Government" by John Locke
https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/john-locke/two-treatises-of-government - "On Liberty" by John Stuart Mill
https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/john-stuart-mill/on-liberty Anonymous 27-09-25 18:54:02 No. 25165
Yup, and that's basically all humans are capable of. The idea that it could be different was only ever believed by the lower classes, because they needed to believe such things were possible if their lives were to be anything other than a living Hell. We have now proven that no such thing is possible, precisely because any time such an idea would be proven viable, it must be terminated on sight.
Anonymous 29-09-25 08:25:25 No. 25174
>>25165 BORING EUGENICS KUN MISANTHROPIC MENTALLY ILL PROSELYTIZATION #999999
Anonymous 29-09-25 08:25:53 No. 25175
>>25170 So is Voltaire's Bastards
Anonymous 09-10-25 15:37:53 No. 25223
>if you read locke (1690) he's a schmittian fascist (1932) AND an ancap (1963)
Anonymous 11-10-25 14:29:41 No. 25224
Nietzsche is for the failsons specifically
Anonymous 11-11-25 16:15:20 No. 25356
>>25223 Obviously I meant that Schmit and the ancaps elaborated on tendencies already pre-existing in liberalism.
Anonymous 11-11-25 21:14:39 No. 25357
Fascists use philosophical and intellectual pretexts because, due to their ideology, they completely fail to understand the richness and nuance of discourse. Unfortunately, you do not offer a nuanced perspective on the issue; Mill's anti-slavery stance would have been interesting in this specific context. Furthermore, please elaborate on your statement: according to which philosophy or definition do you really see fascism, with examples? Locke refers to a limitation of the state's room for maneuver, which is indeed damaging, but these are founding texts, and what followed was not the intention of their authors.