Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

My political ideology development

  • Thread starter blackpillednigga
  • Start date
What exactly is "cultural marxism"
When one speaks of "cultural marxism", one is referring to Gramscian cultural hegemony, which basically applies Marxist theory not only to the economy, but also to culture and society in general. Many on the post-Marxist left were influenced by this and began to apply Marxist theory of oppression and exploitation to racial minorities, foids, and LGBT. Essentially, the modern left uses social progress to undermine capitalist society in every single aspect, from institutions to culture, to make way for communism.
 
Last edited:
What exactly is "cultural marxism"
Alternative name for SJWism. When the old Marxism went bankrupt as an ideological thought in 1970s, the Western student radicals and other utopians switched from class war (working class vs. the capitalists) to race war, gender war, sexuality war and associated topics.
 
Denying or negating biological reality is bluepilled
My country has around 1000 Jewish inhabitants. How did they arrange a conspiracy here, too, to turn women into whores and men into cucks, humanities students into chattle and STEM personel into lackeys?
 
My country has around 1000 Jewish inhabitants. How did they arrange a conspiracy here, too, to turn women into whores and men into cucks, humanities students into chattle and STEM personel into lackeys?
They did so through globalism, using the United States in particular to export degeneracy and cultural progressivism to Europe and the rest of the world. Of course, not all Jews are involved in the conspiracy, and there are many goyim involved, but it is mainly them. You should also look at the Jewish influence in Weimar Germany, where transgenderism, homosexuality, etc. were mainly promoted by Jews.
 
Last edited:
Cultural Marxism refers to very different things depending on the context.

Original context: some antisemitic conspiracy to theory I don't care about.

Modern context: basically the idea of "Marxism" bring integrated in our society. Marxism doesn't refer necessarily to the communist idea. It refers to the superset of ideas that revolve around "class struggle", which originated the LGBTQ movement (LGBTQ vs non LGBTQ), the feminist movement (women vs men) and any other "woke" movements. I conflate wokeism with cultural Marxism but they aren't exactly the same thing. And most wokies don't identify as marxists (even though they are marxists by definition).
I see... But i think the problem with LGBT and feminism stuff is not "cultural marxism", the weak vs the strong. It's liberalism and lack of morals, nihilism/folk hedonism and moral relativism what caused all this problems.
 
When one speaks of "cultural marxism", one is referring to Gramscian cultural hegemony, which basically applies Marxist theory not only to the economy, but also to culture and society in general. Many on the post-Marxist left were influenced by this and began to apply Marxist theory of oppression and exploitation to racial minorities, foids, and LGBT. Essentially, the modern left uses social progress to undermine capitalist society in every single aspect, from institutions to culture, to make way for communism.
I don't see how "the modern left uses social progress (social progress? what do you mean exactly by that?) to undermine capitalist society". If something, feminism and LGBT movements are caused BY liberalism ideology. I see this term of "cultural marxism" as a way liberals try to throw the shit (sorry for the expression) they made themselves into socialism. In other words, feminism and lgbt shit is caused by liberals but they invent this term "cultural marxism" to say It's all socialism fault.
 
Denying or negating biological reality is bluepilled
Not wanting to kill or segregate races is being bluepilles? I don't agree with this neonazis saying we should make other ethnicities stop breeding or get out of europe and all that bullshit.
 
I don't see how "the modern left uses social progress (social progress? what do you mean exactly by that?) to undermine capitalist society". If something, feminism and LGBT movements are caused BY liberalism ideology. I see this term of "cultural marxism" as a way liberals try to throw the shit (sorry for the expression) they made themselves into socialism. In other words, feminism and lgbt shit is caused by liberals but they invent this term "cultural marxism" to say It's all socialism fault.
You should read more about the history of the modern left. Anti-"racism", LGBTism, feminism and so on were promoted by new left academics with Marxist backgrounds. That it is culturally liberal is precisely the point. The left used the relaxed, individualistic and accepting outlook of liberalism to promote the degeneracy of the masses and bring about a social revolution that will destroy reactionary thinking. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Left
Not wanting to kill or segregate races is being bluepilles? I don't agree with this neonazis saying we should make other ethnicities stop breeding or get out of europe and all that bullshit.
Said like a good goy.

Acknowledging reality means acknowledging that there are fundamental differences between the races and that the races are best of being segregated rather than integrated. Also, what’s wrong with wanting Europe to only be inhabited by its natives rather than parasitic foreigners who hate Europe and its people?
 
You should read more about the history of the modern left. Anti-"racism", LGBTism, feminism and so on were promoted by new left academics with Marxist backgrounds. That it is culturally liberal is precisely the point. The left used the relaxed, individualistic and accepting outlook of liberalism to promote the degeneracy of the masses and bring about a social revolution that will destroy reactionary thinking. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Left
Here you are just saying a bunch of no sense. Gay shit and feminism are liberalism. Liberals want their rights, they want to be free. That's the root of liberalism, everyone should be free to do what they want and morals doesn't matter. Where is the socialism here? Socialism is about adding rules to society so people can't be inmoral in economics. Socialism is just a economic theory while liberalism is both economic and philosophical.
There is no such thing as "cultural marxism" nor socialism has anything to do with degeneracy or inmorality.

Said like a good goy.
Why you disrespect? I don't want to engage on some normie fighting, im trying to have an argument.

Acknowledging reality means acknowledging that there are fundamental differences between the races and that the races are best of being segregated rather than integrated. Also, what’s wrong with wanting Europe to only be inhabited by its natives rather than parasitic foreigners who hate Europe and its people?
Where is your premises to prove that we ought to keep races segregated? Where is your premises to prove that "foreigners hate Europe and its people"?
You are claiming a bunch of stuff but not proving it.

I'm not even going to discuss if races are actually that different between each other in terms of IQ or brain.
In the case they are, why should them be segregated? I don't see how that benefits anyone. Some neo-nazis claim that we ought to even exterminate other races. Why? I don't understand.
 
Here you are just saying a bunch of no sense. Gay shit and feminism are liberalism. Liberals want their rights, they want to be free. That's the root of liberalism, everyone should be free to do what they want and morals doesn't matter. Where is the socialism here? Socialism is about adding rules to society so people can't be inmoral in economics. Socialism is just a economic theory while liberalism is both economic and philosophical.
There is no such thing as "cultural marxism" nor socialism has anything to do with degeneracy or inmorality.
You don't quite understand what I'm trying to say, do you? First of all, we are not even discussing socialism, which, as you said, is a very broad economic system and is by no means limited to marxism. We are discussing the cultural aspects of the modern left, which, although it is post-marxist, still has its roots in marxism. As I literally just said and encouraged you to read more on, the new left took shape sometime in the 1960s and 1970s and began to shift its focus from the class struggle in traditional Marxism to a new cultural struggle for supremacy in society. To this end, it adopted anti-racism, feminism and the LGBT movement as a means of undermining "reactionary" culture in general. In doing so, they capitalized on the individualistic and freedom-loving attitudes of liberalism and were able to promote them openly in public without having to worry about the state suppressing them, as they were protected by freedom of speech. You don't believe me? Do your own research and you'll find that most of the prominent anti-racists and feminists from this period were actually members of the New Left.
Why you disrespect? I don't want to engage on some normie fighting, im trying to have an argument.
You believe exactly what the Jews want you to believe, therefore you are a good goy.

Where is your premises to prove that we ought to keep races segregated? Where is your premises to prove that "foreigners hate Europe and its people"?
You are claiming a bunch of stuff but not proving it.

I'm not even going to discuss if races are actually that different between each other in terms of IQ or brain.
In the case they are, why should them be segregated? I don't see how that benefits anyone. Some neo-nazis claim that we ought to even exterminate other races. Why? I don't understand.
Homogeneous societies are always more stable and functional than heterogeneous societies. All great empires, especially the Roman Empire, became decadent due to racial diversity and the mixing of races. The mixing of races is dysgenic and leads to self-hating offspring with low IQs. Also, look at how today's non-white migrants in Europe behave. Few of them are interested in integrating (not that it matters as they're racial aliens) and are only in Europe to take advantage of the established welfare system and high wages. MENA migrants in particular despise Europeans for their colonial past and want to impose their Islamic beliefs on Europe.

@DarkStar
 
Last edited:
Conservative (2016)
Paleoconservative (2017)
Fascist (2018)
National Socialist (2019-2020)
Strasserist/Nazbol (2021)
Eco-Fascist (2022)
Accelerationist/Futurist (2023)
White Identarian and generic Dissident Right (since 2024)
Does your own race care about you?
 
Why do you follow the beliefs of a subversive Jew?
IMG 6203
 
Does your own race care about you?
That's irrelevant because most people of my race don't know what's good for them. I support my race because I want to live in a homogeneous society and I still see potential for greatness in my race.




@blackpillednigga It's not exactly a secret that I don't like most non-whites. However, my reasons for disliking them and advocating for racial separatism go deeper than "bigotry" or "intolerance" as you may think.
 
@blackpillednigga It's not exactly a secret that I don't like most non-whites. However, my reasons for disliking them and advocating for racial separatism go deeper than "bigotry" or "intolerance" as you may think.
I mean I get it living with most poor non-whites is a shitty experience but I dont get why you whites think youre all under attack and are the victims when non-whites rarely attack anyone for being white. I still think despite all the shitty experiences white privilege is real and is only visible when you're not white
 
I mean I get it living with most poor non-whites is a shitty experience but I dont get why you whites think youre all under attack and are the victims when non-whites rarely attack anyone for being white. I still think despite all the shitty experiences white privilege is real and is only visible when you're not white
Yes, most immigrants do not have the intelligence to target whites specifically, minorities as a whole tend to attack each other because it's easy. Doesn't negate the fact that non whites do an extreme proportion if not most of the crime in white counties and whites are projected to become a minority in all of their own countries.

Yes, all white nations are going to die, and yes it is because of Jews and immigrants (or rather, the fact that whites won't protect themselves from those things)
 
Yes, most immigrants do not have the intelligence to target whites specifically, minorities as a whole tend to attack each other because it's easy. Doesn't negate the fact that non whites do an extreme proportion if not most of the crime in white counties and whites are projected to become a minority in all of their own countries.

Yes, all white nations are going to die, and yes it is because of Jews and immigrants (or rather, the fact that whites won't protect themselves from those things)
I said this in another thread but culture has more influence than race. theres no gene in blacks or hispanics that make them more violent and retarded but their families taught them that being a thug is the best way to go about life. I think if they were re-institutionalized into removing their thug culture and immigration was more selective then the race conflicts would pretty much end
 
That's irrelevant because most people of my race don't know what's good for them. I support my race because I want to live in a homogeneous society and I still see potential for greatness in my race.




@blackpillednigga It's not exactly a secret that I don't like most non-whites. However, my reasons for disliking them and advocating for racial separatism go deeper than "bigotry" or "intolerance" as you may think.
You dodged the question. Its cucked to care about a group of people who don't care about you. We all should be self centered
 
2021 - none
2022 - far right
2023 - far right
2024 far right
2025 far right
 
Homogeneous societies are always more stable and functional than heterogeneous societies. All great empires, especially the Roman Empire, became decadent due to racial diversity and the mixing of races. The mixing of races is dysgenic and leads to self-hating offspring with low IQs. Also, look at how today's non-white migrants in Europe behave. Few of them are interested in integrating (not that it matters as they're racial aliens) and are only in Europe to take advantage of the established welfare system and high wages. MENA migrants in particular despise Europeans for their colonial past and want to impose their Islamic beliefs on Europe.

@DarkStar
:yes:

I didn't read the rest of your debate with him, but he asked a bunch of what aboutisms which you gave a solid reply to.
Rich blacks in America do more gun crime than poor whites
:yes:

M9o96YZ

. No need to specify "poor non whites" because they do significantly more even after adjusting income
Do you have anything you can show for this? I have my own stuff like above but it's always good for more sources. :feelsokman:
I mean I get it living with most poor non-whites is a shitty experience
Not even "poor" non-whites

The reason I am a believer in racial-realism is because I lived in a very average, middle-class suburban community my whole life which whilst still majority White due to the fact the US is still mostly "White"- due to many of them being boomers or Latino+MENA+Jew counted- had a lot of people from Hispanic, Black, and other racial "minority" backgrounds. Of course, these were the same people I went to school with.

Generally, whilst we did have some exceptions ofc, most people still followed many traditional images of their race. Blacks & spics acting kinda "thug," the curries I tried to befriend being scammy+backstabbing, and yes ofc many of my own race being kinda stuck-up but it was on an individual or at most familial level(my dad earns this much per year).
but I dont get why you whites think youre all under attack
I'm aware of conflicts in the Middle-East which do tie into issues pertaining to mass-immigration, as well as other economic issues.

I also am aware of mass-immigration to Japan+Korea & very likely China in the not too distant future:

22NetMigration22


Oh look at that, Korea & Japan which never did anything to Indians, Africans, etc(Korea never did anything & Japans was mostly towards Asians+Whites), as well as Russia which under the USSR was an "ally" to various racial groups & tons of smaller countries which never did anything are facing this issue. :feelsjuice:
and are the victims when non-whites rarely attack anyone for being white.
Incorrect:

NafriCrimeStats


Photo 2025 01 05 15 05 24


Homicides with white victims and black offenders were more than 2.3 times more common than the opposite (566 vs 246).

Even then, it's still harmful to society & to pretend otherwise is disingenuous, and I will say that to those on my side who use it as the only argument:

2024 05 19 140001


Photo 2024 05 08 18 06 20




I still think despite all the shitty experiences white privilege is real and is only visible when you're not white
White privilege=richfag privilege & foid privilege ofc.

In terms of JBW, I do agree having certain phenotypes does make you more desirable due to appealing to foids nature+media halo+niche appeal, but that's just purely due to genetics & uglies can exist in all phenotypes. It also mainly works on Noodlewhores.

So I do agree in a way, Whites do have genetic "privilege" but again that only applies to normie Whites & above.

Here's the definition of privilege:

: a right or immunity granted as a peculiar benefit, advantage, or favor : PREROGATIVE
especially : such a right or immunity attached specifically to a position or an office

Essentially, what this really just means is that you are granted an immunity from something which someone else woudlnt have.

Now, here's some things maybe showing we aren't so "privileged" when it comes down to it:
GItvYkfWMAAdlfw 1

Data here shows that certain woke social justice changes have shafted Whites(obviously males) most clearly here.

Also, look at this:

More than a third of white students lie about their race on college applications, survey finds​

  • A survey found that 34 percent of white students who applied to colleges falsely claimed they were a racial minority on their application.
  • Most students, 48 percent, claimed to be Native American on their application.
  • Seventy-seven percent of white applicants who lied about their race on their application were accepted to those colleges.
A survey from Intelligent found that 34 percent of white students who applied to colleges and universities falsely claimed they were a racial minority on their application.

The publication found that 81 percent of students who faked minority status did so to improve their chances of getting accepted. Fifty percent of students who lied said they did it to get minority-focused financial aid.


America is changing faster than ever! Add Changing America to your Facebook or Twitter feed to stay on top of the news.


Most students, 48 percent, claimed to be Native American on their application. Thirteen percent falsely marked that they were Latino, while 10 percent falsely claimed to be Black. Nine percent of those surveyed lied that they were Asian or Pacific Islander.

For the most part, Intelligent found, these white students tended to get away with their lies. About 3 in 4, or 77 percent, of white applicants who faked minority status on their applications were accepted to those colleges.

“While other factors may have played a role in their acceptance, the majority of applicants who lied and were accepted (85%) believe that falsifying their racial minority status helped them secure admission to college,” Intelligent wrote in their report.

Among those willing to fake their minority status, 48 percent of white male applicants lied about their race, while 16 percent of white female applicants did so.

“Twice as many men as women claimed Native American heritage on their applications (54 percent compared to 24 percent). Meanwhile, one in four women (24%) claimed to be Latino. Women are also more than twice as likely as men to pretend to be Black (18% compared to 8%)” Intelligent wrote.

The publication surveyed 1,250 white Americans who had previously applied to college. The survey was conducted on July 13.

If Whites were privileged, why would 1/3rd of us lie about it to try and get into College? :waitwhat:


20240506 222020


And yes, we also work more:

Minorities, especially men, spend a greater fraction of their workdays not working than do white non-Hispanics. These differences are robust to the inclusion of large numbers of demographic, industry, occupation, time and geographic controls.
 
Last edited:
Does your own race care about you?
You dodged the question. Its cucked to care about a group of people who don't care about you. We all should be self centered
This is you:


That's irrelevant because most people of my race don't know what's good for them
I still have a disdain for self-hating, woke SJW Whites & upper-class neoliberals who have played a role in the issues that have happened.
. I support my race because I want to live in a homogeneous society and I still see potential for greatness in my race.
Yeah exactly, I'd just rather live in an area which has lower crime, is better off socio-economically, where I dont have to put up with DEI nonsense.

I also just consider myself a racial realist, which is rooted in biology & scientific measurement which coincides with basic blackpilled beliefs.
@blackpillednigga It's not exactly a secret that I don't like most non-whites. However, my reasons for disliking them and advocating for racial separatism go deeper than "bigotry" or "intolerance" as you may think.
:yes:
You dodged the question.
No he didn't jfl, he provided an appropriate response.
Its cucked to care about a group of people who don't care about you.
A lot of the time, we're speaking idealistically since we recognize the certain potential & contributions our race made:

If one is to discuss the history of science in Europe, one must mention the Greeks. Before the year 0, they create a rich intellectual tradition that is enormously influential for centuries (and even millennia) to come. Said to be ‘the first philosopher’, the ‘father of science’, and the ‘first true mathematician’, the Greek Thales of Miletus (b. ~624 BC) is particularly noteworthy. Thales is the first known person to whom a mathematical proof has been attributed.1 The most famous philosophers of this period are Socrates (b. ~470 BC), Plato (b. ~428 BC) and Aristotle (b. 384 BC).

The Greeks are also the first to establish a rigorous discipline of mathematics. Thales, perhaps the first true mathematician, was mentioned above. Further, Euclid (fl. ~300 BC) is famous for his Elements, a major mathematical treatise. This is the oldest extant work that engages in a large-scale series of deductive proofs, based on a few select axioms. Before the Ancient Greeks, mathematics was based mainly on rules of thumb rather than rigorous deductive proofs. Arguably the greatest ancient mathematician is Archimedes (b. ~287 BC), whose mathematical accomplishments are astounding for his time, and who also is notable as a physicist and engineer.

In the health sciences, Hippocrates (b. ~460 BC) is said to be the ‘father of medicine’ and, born centuries later, Galen (b. 129 AD) is also one of the most influential people in medicine.

The works of Cicero (b. 106 BC) are also of note, as more than a thousand years later, his letters help initiate the Renaissance.

The old Greco-Roman civilizations last a long time, and there are of course many more notable people. Others worth mentioning are Anaximander (b. ~610 BC), Pythagoras (b. ~570 BC), Parmenides (b. ~515 BC), Herodotus (b. ~484 BC), Democritus (b. ~460 BC), Thucydides (b. ~460 BC), Epicurus (b. 341 BC), Eratosthenes (b. ~276 BC), Vitruvius (b. 80 BC), Hero of Alexandria (b. ~10 AD), Pliny the Elder (b. ~23 AD), Ptolemy (b. ~100 AD), Origen (b. ~185 AD), Plotinus (b. ~204 AD), Diophantus (b. ~200 AD), Augustine of Hippo (b. 354 AD), and Boethius (b. 524 AD).

The fall of the Roman empire after 400 AD brings not only the loss of political territory, but the Greco-Roman dominance in the realms of science and philosophy is also no longer. Boethius has been called the “last of the Roman philosophers and the first of the scholastic theologians,” and it will take some time before Europe sees the likes of Aristotle or Archimedes again.

From roughly 800-1050 AD, Scandinavia is in the era of the vikings. While they are skilled shipbuilders and sailors, and have a writing system and poetry, these Norsemen have no intellectual tradition that compares with the Greco-Romans. They do, however, make an impressive discovery. Starting from Scandinavia, vikings sail far across the oceans. First they discover Iceland; later Greenland, which is settled by Erik the Red (b. ~950 AD); and eventually they manage to reach continental North America. They are the first Europeans to discover this continent, and this feat will not be redone for another half millennium. According to the sagas, Leif Erikson (b. ~970 AD) is the one who discovers continental North America and establishes the first Norse settlement there.

In the remainder of Europe — that which is not Mediterranean nor Scandinavian — we see the early intellectual seeds growing in places such as the British Isles, France and Germany. While it is fair to say that the scholarship here is in many ways underdeveloped when measured against the extraordinary Greco-Romans, it is a mistake to think of it as intellectually and culturally barren with little but religious superstition. The lives and works of numerous people are a testament to an impressive emerging intellectual tradition. Examples of notable people are Alcuin of York (b. ~735 AD), Dungal of Bobbio (fl. 811–828 AD), Ratramnus (b. ~800AD), Rudolf of Fulda (b. ~800 AD), Walafrid Strabo (b. ~808 AD), Remigius of Auxerre (b. ~841 AD), John the Exarch (b. ~850 AD), Æthelweard (b. ~947 AD), Dudo of Saint-Quentin (b. ~965 AD), and Berengar of Tours (b. ~998 AD). Arguably, the most notable is the Irish philosopher John Scotus Eriugena (b. ~800 AD), who has been called the “the most astonishing person of the ninth century.”2 But the greatest of science has yet to come in Europe, and the next sections will list some of the numerous notable individuals who bring that to fruition.

Years 1000-1120​


In 1100 AD much of Spain has been ruled by Muslims for centuries, and notable people such as Ibn Hazm (b. 994), Avempace (b. ~1085), Ibn Zuhr (b. 1094), and Ibn Tufail (b. 1105) reflect this. Non-Islamic Europe near this period also has its fair share of notable people, including the Byzantine Greek Michael Psellos (b. ~1018), German chronicler Adam of Bremen (b. ~1050), the French philosopher Roscellinus (b. ~1050), English philosopher and translator Adelard of Bath (b. ~1075), French philosopher Peter Abelard (b. ~1079), the English historian William of Malmesbury (b. ~1095), and the Italian scholastic theologian Peter Lombard (b. ~1096).

In the middle ages much, if not most, scholarship occurs in a religious context. The origin of many medieval universities, the first of which are yet to be established, can also be traced back to Catholic cathedral or monastic schools. Medieval scholars are also more sophisticated than they are often given credit for. For example, contrary to what's often suggested, scholars of this time know that the Earth is not flat. This is revealed in the writings of multiple medieval scholars. For example the historian introduced above, Adam of Bremen, mentions this fact about the Earth in passing as if it's widely understood among learned people.3

Years 1120-1230​


By 1230, several universities have appeared in Europe, some of which exist to this day. Examples are the universities of Bologna, Paris (closed intermittently due to the French Revolution), Oxford, Salamanca, and Cambridge.

Some notable individuals around this period include the Sephardic philosophers Maimonides (b. ~1138) and Nachmanides (b. ~1194), Cambro-Norman historian Gerald of Wales (b. ~1146), Danish historian Saxo Grammaticus (b. ~1150), the influential English Robert Grosseteste (b. ~1168), German friar Albertus Magnus (b. ~1200), English Roger Bacon (b. ~1219), and the explorers Benjamin of Tudela (b. 1130) and William of Rubruck (b. ~1220). Grosseteste and Bacon are noteworthy for their emphasis on empiricism and are considered by many particularly important for the development of modern science in Europe.

Al-Andalus (Muslim-ruled Iberia) continues to have some notable names like Averroes (b. 1126), Ibn al-Baytar (b. 1197) and Ibn al-Nafis (b. 1213). The Italian Gerard of Cremona (b. ~1114) translates many of the Arabic scientific works into Latin. Islamic intellectuals were greatly influenced by the Ancient Greeks, and the rediscovery of much Ancient Greek scholarship in Europe comes from translations from Arabic (which itself had been translated into Arabic).

North Italy is becoming increasingly influential. Particularly of note is Pisa’s Fibonacci (b. ~1170), one of the most important medieval mathematicians. Among many other contributions, he helps popularize the Hindu-Arabic numeral system in Europe. The astronomer and teacher at the University of Paris, Johannes de Sacrobosco (b. ~1195), also writes a short introduction to the Hindu-Arabic numeral system, and this book becomes the most widely read book on the topic in the following several centuries.

Years 1230-1360​


Notability is spread around United Kingdom, France, Germany and, particularly, North Italy.

Notable people include the the French Vincent of Beauvais (b. ~1184), who worked on an early encyclopedia from 1235 to 1264, a major compendium of contemporary knowledge. Further, the philosopher from Mallorca Ramon Llull (b. ~1232), the German Meister Eckhart (b. ~1260), the Scottish philosopher Duns Scotus (b. ~1265), the English philosopher William of Ockham (b. ~1285), the French Nicole Oresme (b. ~1325), the English John Wycliffe (b. ~1328) are all noteworthy.

Italy continues its great influence with notable individuals such as Bonaventure (b. 1221), Thomas Aquinas (b. 1225), and the famous explorer Marco Polo (b. 1254) from Venice.

Bonaventure, Aquinas, Scotus and Ockham together form the four most important Christian philosopher-theologians of the High Middle Ages. These theologians not only write about religion, but also have considerable influence on secular thought and make important intellectual contributions to the development of science.

Years 1360-1450​


Europe is slowly entering the Renaissance phase, marking its transition from the Middle Ages to modernity. Many regions in Europe are intellectually active but Italy is clearly still on top, particularly the cities of Florence, Padua and Venice.

Humanism is a dominant theme of Renaissance philosophy with Leonardo Bruni (b. ~1370), Poggio Bracciolini (b. 1380), Nicholas of Cusa (b. 1401), Lorenzo Valla (b. ~1407), and Marsilio Ficino (b. 1433), and many others.

Filippo Brunelleschi (b. 1377) is a greatly influential architect and engineer, considered to be a founding father of Renaissance architecture. Other notable people include Prince Henry the Navigator (b. 1394), the German mathematician Regiomontanus (b. 1436), and perhaps most importantly, Johannes Gutenberg (b. 1394), the inventor of a mechanical printing press, a major milestone accelerating the transmission of intellectual work.

Years 1450-1560​


The entire Central and Western Europe light up. By 1500, more than 50 universities have been established throughout the continent in what are presently the countries of Italy, France, United Kingdom, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Czech Republic, Poland, Austria, Hungary, Germany, Albania, Croatia, Belgium, Switzerland, Sweden, and Denmark. The ‘university’ is arguably an exclusively European institution, although other kinds of centers of learning have existed outside Europe (e.g. in China, India and the Islamic world).


Raphael’s The School of Athens, Renaissance painting from 1511, depicts many figures we’ve covered so far

At this point even the most notable people are becoming too numerous to all be mentioned. The single most famous person in this period is the Italian polymath Leonardo da Vinci (b. 1452). Other noteworthy figures from Italy include Luca Pacioli (b. ~1447) and Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (b. 1463).

The biggest mathematicians of this period are Niccolò Fontana Tartaglia (b. ~1499), Gerolamo Cardano (b. 1501) and François Viète (b. 1540). They progress mathematics in a number of ways. Historically, mathematical equations and calculations were described verbally, but in this period numerous steps are taken towards a more concise and efficient symbolic algebra.

Astronomy, and empirical science more broadly, make great progress with Nicolaus Copernicus (b. 1473) and Tycho Brahe (b. 1546), who both make pioneering contributions to the scientific revolution. Other names here include Giordano Bruno (b. 1548) and John Napier (b. 1550).

Important contributions to anatomy and the ‘medical revolution’ are done by Paracelsus (b. ~1493), Ambroise Paré (b. ~1510), Andreas Vesalius (b. 1514), the ‘founder of modern anatomy’, and Hieronymus Fabricius (b. 1533).

Influential thinkers of other kinds include Erasmus (b. 1466), considered one of the greatest scholars of the Northern Renaissance, as well as the political philosopher Niccolò Machiavelli (b. 1469). The religious domain has noteworthy names in Thomas More (b. 1478), Martin Luther (b. 1483) and John Calvin (b. 1509) of ‘Calvinism’.

The age of exploration is also upon Europe, and alongside Italy’s continued great influence, Spain and Portugal are important in this domain. Italy has John Cabot (b. ~1450), Amerigo Vespucci (b. 1451) and the famous Christopher Columbus (b. 1451). Portugal has Bartolomeu Dias (b. ~1450), Vasco da Gama (b. ~1469), and Pedro Álvares Cabral (b. ~1467), and Ferdinand Magellan (b. 1480). Spain has Juan Ponce de León (b. 1474), Vasco Núñez de Balboa (b. ~1475), Francisco Pizarro (b. 1478) , and Hernán Cortés (b. 1485). Relatedly, geography and cartography also makes important progress with notable individuals Garardus Mercator (b. 1512) and Abraham Ortelius (b. 1527).

By 1560, the major coasts of America have largely been explored, and the Spanish conquistadors have encountered the Incas and conquered the Aztec Empire. Portuguese explorers have passed the southern tip of Africa, reaching India, and established new important spice trade routes.

Years 1560-1630​


Italy is still highly active but no longer dominant. Notability has moved more to the northwest in Europe and four cities in particular light up: London, Paris, Amsterdam, and Antwerp.

This period has notable philosophers such as Francis Bacon (b. 1561), the ‘father of empiricism,’ Hugo Grotius (b. 1583), and Thomas Hobbes (b. 1588). The most influential philosopher and mathematician is probably René Descartes (b. 1596).

In his later years, the astronomer and mathematician Christopher Clavius (b. 1538) is one of the most respected astronomers at this time. The most famous and arguably most influential individuals in this discipline, however, are Galileo Galilei (b. 1564) and Johannes Kepler (b. 1571).

By 1630, the understanding of astronomy has greatly improved. The increasingly more accurate empirical astronomical measurements, which especially Tycho Brahe was an early pioneer of, make it clear that early models of the solar system are inadequate. Copernicus had forwarded the model of the solar system where plants orbited the Sun in circular paths. Through analyzing the astronomical observations of Tycho, Kepler develops his three laws of planetary motion and establishes that orbits are elliptical rather than circular. The more accurate understanding of orbital paths, alongside Galileo’s discoveries of celestial bodies that do not orbit the Earth, give credence to the correct heliocentric view.

Other noteworthy figures in this period include the polymath Athanasius Kircher (b. 1602), the seafarer Abel Tasman (b. 1603), the physicist and mathematician Evangelista Torricelli (b. 1608), and the French mathematician Pierre de Fermat (b. 1607). The anatomist and physiologist William Harvey (b. 1578) makes the most detailed description of the blood circulatory system to date.

Years 1630-1740​


Spain has seen a substantial downward trend in notable people from 1500 to 1700. Notability continues to be clustered in Paris and London, and also across the Netherlands and Germany.

Important names in the physical sciences and engineering include Robert Boyle (b. 1627), Christiaan Huygens (b. 1629), the military engineer Sébastien de Vauban (b. 1633), and Robert Hooke (b. 1635). Astronomy has important names such as Ole Rømer (b. 1644), the first to measure the speed of light, and Edmond Halley (b. 1656).

Mathematics and physics undergo tremendous progress. Isaac Newton (b. 1643) and Gottfried von Leibniz (b. 1646) independently create what we now call ‘calculus’, essential for mathematically describing many physical phenomena. Newton also establishes classical mechanics with his laws of motion, bringing about a unification of the current understanding of gravity with other observable phenomena in the universe. This also sets heliocentrism on a firm theoretical foundation. These names are already impressive enough, but it doesn’t stop there. The philosopher and mathematician Blaise Pascal (b. 1623) is highly notable and later comes the birth of Leonhard Euler (b. 1707), one of history’s most important mathematicians. Other important mathematicians and physicists include the brothers Jacob (b. 1655) and Johann Bernoulli (b. 1667), Johann’s son Daniel Bernoulli (b. 1700), and the French Émilie du Châtelet (b. 1706) and Jean d’Alembert (b. 1717).

Important names in the life sciences include ‘the father of microbiology’ Antonie van Leeuwenhoek (b. 1632), Maria Sibylla Merian (b. 1647), the Swedish ‘father of modern taxonomy’ Carl Linnaeus (b. 1707), and Count Buffon (b. 1707).

Notable philosophers and thinkers in other domains include John Locke (b. 1632), Baruch Spinoza (b. 1632), David Hume (b. 1711), Jean-Jacques Rousseau (b. 1712), Adam Smith (b. 1723) and Immanuel Kant (b. 1724).

Scientists are increasingly engaging in systematization. Individual pieces of knowledge are not only gathered, there is also an attempt to understand them together according to overarching theories or principles. Newton establishing how gravity on earth and planetary orbits together can be understood by one and the same theory is an excellent example of this. Another great example is Carl Linnaeus formalizing binomial nomenclature and embarking upon the greatest attempt so far of classifying life forms. A compelling theory to understand how all these different life forms have emerged is still required and the central figure here, Darwin, is born circa thirty years after the death of Linnaeus.

Years 1740-1850​


The Industrial Revolution is undergoing at full force. The three most important European countries appear to be the United Kingdom, France and Germany, however certainly with plenty of activity outside those countries too.

Possibly the most important component of industrialization is the transition to mechanical manufacturing processes and taking control of electricity. The steam engine by James Watt (b. 1736) is a great example of this. A particularly notable engineer is Isambard Brunel (b. 1806) who makes important contributions to technology for bridges, ships, tunnels and railways.

Pioneering work towards understanding and controlling electricity is done by people such as Alessandro Volta (b. 1745), André-Marie Ampère (b. 1775), Hans Christian Ørsted (b. 1777), Georg Ohm (b. 1789), and Michael Faraday (b. 1791). This eventually develops into an understanding of the connection between electricity and magnetism — electromagnetism — the second great unification in physics (the first being Newton unifying gravity and the laws of motion). This unification reaches its conclusion when it becomes mathematically described by the equations of James Maxwell (b. 1831).

Charles Babbage (b. 1791) invents the first mechanical computer. The true potential of mechanical computers and computerized algorithms will of course only be realized more than a century later (with many notable and important people along the way); which is itself a different kind of revolution beyond the industrial one.

Chemistry also progresses greatly in this period. Important names here include Joseph Priestley (b. 1733), Antoine Lavoisier (b. 1743), and John Dalton (b. 1766), the latter whom introduces atomic theory. Additionally, Amedeo Avogadro (b. 1776), Humphry Davy (b. 1778), and Jöns Jacob Berzelius (b. 1779) are notable. Arguably, ‘modern chemistry’ is established in this period.

In mathematics, both pure and applied (e.g. in physics), several important names come to mind: Joseph-Louis Lagrange (b. 1736), Pierre-Simon Laplace (b. 1749), Joseph Fourier (b. 1768), Augustin-Louis Cauchy (b. 1789), Augustin-Jean Fresnel (b. 1789), Niels Abel (b. 1802), Évariste Galois (b. 1811), George Boole (b. 1815), William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin (b. 1824) and Bernhard Riemann (b. 1826). The biggest of them all, however, is Carl Friedrich Gauss (b. 1777). It is sometimes said that, if you want to guess who is responsible for a discovery in mathematics, chances are you’ll be correct if you guess either Gauss or Euler.

In the life sciences, we also have a number of important names. The most obvious being Charles Darwin (b. 1809), who revolutionizes biology with his theory of natural (and sexual) selection. But many others are worth mentioning. Edward Jenner (b. 1749) creates the world’s first vaccine (against smallpox). Alfred Wallace (b. 1823) independently conceives of many similar ideas as Darwin. Gregor Mendel (b. 1822) makes important discoveries on how heredity works. Other notable people include Georges Cuvier (b. 1769), Justus von Liebig (b. 1803), Louis Pasteur (b. 1822), Francis Galton (b. 1822), Thomas Henry Huxley (b. 1825). Pasteur, for example, makes major contributions to the understanding of causes and preventions of diseases. He discovers important principles of vaccination, microbial fermentation and pasteurization.

Despite centuries of global exploration, much of the world remains unexplored by Europeans into the 1800s, particularly land not near any coasts. A number of explorers are worth mentioning, for example James Cook (b. 1728), famous for his journeys to New Zealand and Australia, and Mungo Park (b. 1771), the first European person to record travels into the deep interior regions of West Africa.

Numerous influential philosophers exist in this period. These include Georg Hegel (b. 1770), Arthur Schopenhauer (b. 1788), the liberal philosophers Alexis de Tocqueville (b. 1805) and John Stuart Mill (b. 1806), and the existentialist Søren Kierkegaard (b. 1813).

Beyond the Industrial Revolution (1850-1950)​


Rapid progress in science and technology continues beyond the industrial revolution. First, multiple engineers making important technological contributions are worth mentioning. Alexander Graham Bell (b. 1847) patents the first practical telephone. Nikola Tesla (b. 1856) does important work related to electricity. Guglielmo Marconi (b. 1874) creates a radio wave-based wireless telegraph system and is considered the inventor of the radio.

The building blocks of matter are subject to ever greater investigation, leading to a more accurate understanding of matter at the smallest scale. J. J. Thomson (b. 1856) discovers the electron, the first subatomic particle discovered. Wilhelm Röntgen (b. 1845), Pierre Curie (b. 1859), Marie Curie (b. 1867), and Otto Hahn (b. 1879) conduct pioneering research into the radioactivity, and Ernest Rutherford (b. 1871) has become known as the ‘father of nuclear physics.’

The most famous scientist is undoubtedly Albert Einstein (b. 1879), who makes pioneering contributions to quantum mechanics, alongside important figures such as Planck, Bohr, Schrödinger, Heisenberg, Born, Dirac, among others (these influential individuals captured in the famous picture above of the gathering at the fifth Solvay conference in 1927). Einstein, however, is most famous for developing the theory of relativity, ultimately superseding the more than 200 years old framework of classical mechanics of Newton. The understanding of the properties of nature at the scale of (sub)atoms ultimately also leads to one of the most potent discoveries: the atomic (nuclear) bomb. Enrico Fermi (b. 1901) is also worth mentioning here as the first to create a nuclear reactor.

A few mathematicians are of particular noteworthiness in this period. These are the logician Gottlob Frege (b. 1848), Henri Poincaré (b. 1854) and David Hilbert (b. 1862). Poincaré and Hilbert have both been considered the last mathematicians who excelled in all major fields of the discipline4. Influential for both mathematical and philosophical reasons, there is also Bertrand Russell (b. 1872). Theorems established by Emmy Noether (b. 1882) are of great importance in mathematical physics, and John von Neumann (b. 1903) makes major contributions to many fields, e.g., in mathematics, physics, computing, and statistics.

There is also growing interest into understanding human and animal behavior, which develops into the social sciences such as psychology, sociology and economics. Francis Galton (mentioned in the previous section) is considered by some the founder of behavioral genetics. Ivan Pavlov (b. 1849) discovers classical conditioning through his experiments on dogs. Sigmund Freud (b. 1856) is undoubtedly one of the most famous psychologists (or, in some circles, the most infamous). Carl Jung (b. 1875), like Freud, is also famous for his work on psychoanalysis, although Jung develops it in a different direction. Alfred Binet (b. 1857) establishes the first practical IQ test, and Jean Piaget (b. 1896) is well known for his research on children’s mental development. Émile Durkheim (b. 1858) establishes the academic discipline of sociology. In economics, John Maynard Keynes (b. 1883) and Friedrich Hayek (b. 1899) are particularly influential.

Statistics as a discipline matures. Galton makes some of the earliest pioneering contributions to statistics. Karl Pearson (b. 1857), who also works with Galton, is often credited with establishing the discipline of mathematical statistics. Ronald Fisher (b. 1890) also makes numerous major contributions to statistics and, taking steps further, he combines statistics with genetics which helps establish the fields of quantitative genetics and population genetics; one of the greatest in biology since Darwin. Speaking of biology, in 1953, the (correct) double helix structure of DNA is proposed and published in a paper by Watson and Crick.

Important discoveries in biology also help combat disease. Robert Koch (b. 1843) discovers the causative agents of various deadly infectious diseases including tuberculosis, cholera and anthrax. Alexander Fleming (b. 1881) discovers penicillin, an effective antibiotic.

Several philosophers are also notable. Examples are Friedrich Nietzsche (b. 1844), Martin Heidegger (b. 1889) and Ludwig Wittgenstein (b. 1889). In the context of people of science, the philosopher of science Karl Popper (b. 1902) is perhaps of extra note. Popper introduces the concept of falsification, which, in the popular mind, sometimes seems almost synonymous with the scientific method (despite its relatively recent introduction in the history of science).

As we move closer to modern technology, a few names are notable. Wernher von Braun (b. 1912) is a pioneer of rocket and space technology and in 1969 the first human crew lands on the moon. Alan Turing (b. 1912) is influential in the development of theoretical computer science as well as cryptography. Computer technology progresses throughout the century in a number of ways. In 1947 the transistor is invented by John Bardeen (b. 1908), Walter Brattain (b. 1902) and William Shockley (b. 1910). In 1957 the first personal computer controlled by one person is invented by IBM. Also in 1957, the optical amplifier is invented; foundational to powering the internet. This marks the transition into a new period, sometimes referred to as The Information Age.

And like I said, even if they are cucks I'd rather just live around them as opposed to deal with crime and people who also are even more culturally & phenotypically removed -both play a big part in social interaction+cohesion. :feelsjuice:

You also have to at least understand, stuff such as DEI & other "woke" stuff in the media, academia, etc. is an issue- at least be reasonable there.
 
There is no such thing as "cultural marxism" nor socialism has anything to do with degeneracy or inmorality.
"Cultural Marxism" is an umbrella term. Leftist scholars and activists started with it in 1970s. It's the cult of racial minorities (first and foremost black people, with little to no attention being paid to East Asians), religious minorities (esp. Muslims), homosexuals and women. The latter are presented as eternal victims of "western patriarchal tyranny" which is obvious BS. Nowadays, too, it's the left (incl. economic left) that is the foremost champion of this incoherent set of ideas. Some leftist political parties, however, do not fully embrace this ideology, but these are very rare cases (e.g. the Dutch Socialist Party). So it's Old Left vs. New Left.

Apart from that, the elites have adopted lots of this, without being economically leftist. Check this (a biased Wikipedia article ofc) and read the memo that started the controversy.
 
thanks, saved- anything else like this you can share?

This doesn't paint the full picture ofc, since you yourself have to really look at things & piece it together: However, this is good insight.
I said this in another thread but culture has more influence than race. theres no gene in blacks or hispanics that make them more violent and retarded but their families taught them that being a thug is the best way to go about life. I think if they were re-institutionalized into removing their thug culture and immigration was more selective then the race conflicts would pretty much end
I disagree, genetics do for sure play a role

I mean, how can we as blackpillers believe genetics determine so much in life, yet go full woke on this?

It just makes sense that a population which has lived in a certain environment(makes certain traits selected for) can & will have certain genes which can impact intelligence:


Here's some other stuff I spoke about:
Now yes, I do agree that they are respectable for industrializing & their achievements but that all stems due to Whites. Asiatics also lack creativity, due to a certain gene:

View attachment 1256964


Here, we demonstrate for the first time a robust association between cultural values of individualism–collectivism and allelic frequency of the serotonin transporter gene, controlling for associated economic and disease factors. Geographical regions characterized by cultural collectivism exhibit a greater prevalence of S allele carriers of the serotonin transporter gene, even when cultural regions rather than nations served as the unit of analysis. Additionally, we show that global variability in historical pathogen prevalence predicts global variability in individualism–collectivism owing to genetic selection of the S allele of the serotonin transporter gene in regions characterized by high collectivism. Importantly, we also reveal a novel and surprising negative association between individualism–collectivism, frequency of S allele carriers of the serotonin transporter gene and global prevalence of anxiety and mood disorder. Across nations, both collectivism and allelic frequency of the S allele negatively predict global prevalence of anxiety and mood disorders. Critically, our results further indicate that greater population frequency of S allele carriers is associated with decreased prevalence of anxiety and mood disorders due to increased cultural collectivism.
“We know of a gene that may play a part in this story: the 7R (for 7-repeat) allele of the DRD4 (dopamine receptor D4) gene. It is associated with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), a behavioral syndrome best characterized by actions that annoy elementary school teachers: restless-impulsive behavior, inattention, distractibility, and the like.


“The polymorphism is found at varying but significant levels in many parts of the world, but is almost totally absent from East Asia. Interestingly, alleles derived from the 7R allele are fairly common in China, even though the 7R alleles themselves are extremely rare there. It is possible that individuals bearing these alleles were selected against because of cultural patterns in China. The Japanese say that the nail that sticks out is hammered down, but in China it may have been pulled out and thrown away.”

 
Cucked as hell, honestly.At least you’re not cucked regarding race since you made a thread where you said that being attracted to sheboons is a low IQ trait.
 
Cucked as hell, honestly.At least you’re not cucked regarding race since you made a thread where you said that being attracted to sheboons is a low IQ trait.
He doesn't believe in racial realism or in borders, sadly
 
Of course there are various genetic predispositions. Denying this is pseudoscientific. East Asians are more docile than Caucasians, Spics are less impulsive/violent than Niggas. Caucasians are closer to East Asians than to Spics. Southeast Asians have a modest average IQ, but seem to be docile, too.

Crime statistics in Europe show a similar picture in any european country that has sufficient ethnos to make generalizations.

As a person's ethnic background isn't his own choice, it would be dumb to bash people based on race, but the differences are real. The environment in, say, Denmark or Sweden is very similar for all these groups, yet outcomes are quite different.

The Chinese in Denmark are actually underrepresented in the Danish crime statistics, being less violent than "real" Danes.
 
huh? I'm fine with borders. I just think the anti-immigration sentiment generalizes people too much, but I have no problem with restricting who goes in
 
huh? I'm fine with borders.
I think you once said you were fine without them but this was a long time ago
I just think the anti-immigration sentiment generalizes people too much,
how so?
but I have no problem with restricting who goes in
I'm alright with taking on temporary workers in some cases, but I dont' think they should be allowed to actually settle & mix with people there in terms of marriage.
 

Similar threads

DarkStar
Replies
22
Views
3K
DarkStar
DarkStar
Defetivecuckachu
Replies
8
Views
202
Ibrahim997
Ibrahim997
Shaktiman
Replies
17
Views
3K
Jaxxel
Jaxxel
Shaktiman
Replies
6
Views
2K
CHOoseWisely123
CHOoseWisely123

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top