>>33694 You sound evil, but I'm not here to argue about that. I will argue that "terrorism" is a jewish label for resistance to their schemes, and it's laughable once you're redpilled on the kikes because they gleefully use terror whenever they feel like it.

>>34211 Oh okay

>>33694 Morality is whatever serves the State.

>>33694 Terrorism is only immoral in the sense that only a victorious rebel is seen as a freedom fighter. Only people who lose or did not win yet are terrorists. If the terrorists win they simply rewrite history to make all the dirty work look heroic. In a way being aggressive enough to commit acts of terror is a winning move because you can only win by attacking. So genetically men who are mildly predisposed to terrorism will simply eventually win.

>>33694 > Is terrorism immoral? Yes >What exactly makes people "innocent"? Are they directly involved? >In nature there is no such thing as innocence. Yes, there is. >There is no such thing as random chance or being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Yes, there is. >Everything happens for a reason, everything exists in a particular equilibrium with everything else. Not really >If something bad happens to you it's ultimately because of a flaw in your DNA and your inability to compete for the necessary resources in the ecosystem you exist in. No, it isn't. >But what if the ecosystem itself is the problem, not your DNA? Then you either leave or change your attitude. >What if your DNA is destined to outlast the ecosystem? You wouldn't know that. >>34211 > I will argue that "terrorism" is a jewish label for resistance to their schemes "Terrorism" is actually a term derived from the French Revolution, specifically in reference to the Reign of Terror when Robespierre and tha Jacobins were executing anyone and everyone for any reason imaginable, most common which not submitting to their Cult of Reason. >>34625 >Image Why are you screencapping posts about retards who refuse to hold their spaghetti, and surprised as a result that people don't want to hang around them? No one honestly cares about your terrible opinions. And the only reason why Progressives "get away with it" is because they're the exact kind of retard who cannot shut the fuck up and no one wants to hang around. Regular people care as much about your analysis of the Byzantine Empire as they do about the shit they took last night. If they actually did care, they would ask for your opinion on a matter, but even that sometime isn't an invintation to voice your thoughts as they're only asking to be polite.

>>34650 >Retard take * 3 >Massive wall of text sneeding >But others don't wanna be around those who spam unsolicited!

I'm going to be honest, that sounds like a lot of animalistic materialist nonsense to me. You can justify anything with that logic, in which case what exactly differentiates you from them?

>>33694 Terrorism is wrong, and no one should advocate for it or do it.

>>34650 braindead NPC spewing its biases without reasoning that's what NPCs are, that's what the masses are. They are braindead bias propagation units that just spam the shit they were brainwashed with. This is by jewish design. They were bred for this trait under christianity. They are the walls of our prison.

>>34701 >>34836 Oh okay

someone's terrorist is someone else's freedom fighter who are you to pretend to know which one is right?

>>35006 fuck, wrong pic

Terrorism is morally wrong because it targets innocent civilians and makes a small vanguard party judge, jury and executioner. The use of terror as a tool can only replace one tyranny with another. The only way to replace a tyrannical state with one that acts in the interest of its constituents is through peaceful protest and passive resistance. The downside is that this requires broad unity of spirit among those groups that do not benefit from the state of affairs. Divide and conquer is simply too effective as a strategy. Even though people are acutely aware of it today, it still works.

>>35010 >>34625 There doesn't seem to be anything really wrong in these. But these don't really get to the heart of the matter. What happens to people who live under systems like these for generations? What happens to people who accept slave morality? What happens to bloodlines - people, generation after generation - that accept slave morality? >>35052 Oh okay

>>35052 That is only true if you value what is relatively a handful of people over the entirety of what you're trying to achieve. Currently a small vanguard is playing judge, jury and executioner. If you go back before they were in power they would probably be characterized as terrorists by the powers that ruled before them.

What a dead board

>>33694 End justify mean! If you terrorize a Jew loving Shabbos Goy neighborhood then its a good thing.

>>33694 Morality is a retarded standard against which to judge anything because it is culturally determined and changes based on context and time. It's more relevant to ask if something is effective and the answer then is yes but it depends also on popular opinion and media coverage. The economy terrorists for example don't get much media coverage and although many people might agree with them they also tend to be faggots who don't want to upset the status quo. Then you have right wing terrorism which gets a lot of media coverage but that coverage and public opinion tends to be negative. Then you have people setting teslas on fire which gets media coverage and is generally considered favorably by the public (outside of right wing Elon dick riders) and has caused Elon himself to withdraw and his company to lose lots of money. But even in this case it begs the question of if terrorism itself is the cause or merely a symptom of people reacting to the situation. I think that in most instances terrorism itself is not a tool to affect change so much as it is a response to conditions being imposed by others.

>>38500 >eco not economy Also to the OP. Economy systems are not society. Society is a cultural construct that is made of the rules both spoken and unspoken that a group of people agree to adhear to. Society is the technology, the buildings the infrastructure and how we use them in relation to each other. An eco system by comparison is purely a series of relations between all organisms in a given area. While this can also include features of the climate and terrain the main conception of it is how the organisms relate to each other. In this way Society is much more artificial than an ecosystem by virtue of society having more artificial elements within its conception.

>>38500 Morality is just a set of logical and emotional biases, biases interpreted, accepted, rejected and propagated by the mind. It's a subset of society, society also deals with various physical biases. All of these biases have various mechanisms that connect each other, and they effectively moderate each other to maintain an equilibrium. "Terrorism" in a pure abstract sense is a sudden introduction of a bias that triggers an extreme response from the equilibrium mechanisms due to how different it is from the expected biases. Any kind of change in society causes a similar response, a response of fear as the bias storage units ("people") try to negotiate their way out of having to modify their biases in equilibrium with the new bias, trying to minimize the amount of bias they have to change. They have definite limits to what the infrastructure of their minds and their infrastructure for communicating with others can handle. If you introduce an extreme bias to people their infrastructure could break down and cause them to do 'undefined behavior'. People know they bug out when things get too weird, and they fear going into that state. Terrorism doesn't have to be violent, it can simply be weird. It moves people all the same. >>38522 Economy is part of society. In this society it is the main part. I wouldn't call society a set a of rules, but biases, and a system for their modification and propagation. That's what the economy does, it sorts people into a hierarchy based on their expressed biases to prioritize them for resources with which they further propagate those biases. It's the primary genetic selection mechanism in the short term for this reason. But in the long term it's effect on the gene pool can be negated just by the society collapsing and the sub-genepool it bred being destroyed.

>>33694 >What exactly makes people "innocent"? Having not caused you harm. If you don't know them, and you can't name some way they've wronged you, they are innocent. It's possible they have wronged someone else completely unrelated to you, but you are not God, you don't know the circumstances behind that (perhaps the person they have wronged has forgiven them), and you do not have a right to cast judgment upon humanity in general. Justice, even vigilante justice, must be precise. >In nature there is no such thing as innocence. Morality is not a property of nature, so this is a meaningless statement. >There is no such thing as random chance or being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Those are jewish lies created to make you fear the world. You are a Jew making up lies to justify random acts of violence that have collateral damage. >Everything happens for a reason, everything exists in a particular equilibrium with everything else. >If something bad happens to you it's ultimately because of a flaw in your DNA and your inability to compete for the necessary resources in the ecosystem you exist in. Just World Fallacy The entire rest of your argument is just a variation of the Just World Fallacy,

>>38948 Oh okay

>>33694 You'll cry and beg for mercy when they come to kill you faggot

>>38948 Oh. okay.

Why is everyone on the internet so literally fucking retarded? They cannot engage in the most basic philosophy. It's just not real. All the real people are being censored out by AI and only the kneejerking retard meme cattle are left.

>>42143 > on the internet Hit LessWrong or something, imageboards are the schizoid Mastodon in terms of IQ.