if marxists should be killed because they are a subset of people with a martyr complex, then christians form another subset of that same set. it is then objected that the much stronger martyr complex of marxists requires that they be killed. this implies that the weaker martyr complex of christians should be fulfilled by annoying them, such as by being forced to live in a gratuitously pagan state.

(pthagnar: aren't christians told to expect torture and repression for their beliefs, though? and isn't there a definite relationship between suffering and salvation? even mother teresa deliberately pushed for it. i'm not sure it's quite as "additional" in practice, as compared with marxist soteriology, as you imply. sure, once you accept jesus (etc), you are saved, but suffering helps you accept jesus (etc) better, maximizing your chances of success.)

You're doing it again. Extrapolating from pthag's statements is usually a bad idea.

what's the right way to respond to him?

It varies. I won't tell you what to do, but two options are taking it with massive grains of salt, or nonresponse.

what's the harm in engaging him?

Mostly it leads to a lot of frustration and confusion—but, in theory, you could accidentally absorb some of his soul and become similarly sardonic and obnoxious.

isn't that a good thing

*sprays lime juice at Nortaneous*

You all could learn a thing or two from that guy.

Lesson one: turn gay so you don't have to pay for kids, then tour the world.

But what if we're gay and just as likely to have kids as if we weren't?

PARADOX

sincere thanks for the concern, but i'd rather find out where my reasoning is off the mark than worry about becoming frustrated, confused, sardonic or obnoxious.

or who knows, you could become the first person to out-argument pthagnar

加油

also: what's the point of having a pthagnar if you're not going to have him get into arguments dammit

(actually, people rarely ever acknowledge defeat in zbb arguments.)

pthagnar says that martyrdom is essential to marxist salvation in a way that doesn't apply to christian salvation. my suggestion is that suffering helps you meet the conditions for christian salvation as well, so it is desirable to dole it out to christians in measured doses. mother teresa appears to agree. any ideas on how i might be mistaken? ()

(also hallow, i'm not sure it's possible to "out-argue" him, because this is less about being correct or incorrect than establishing whether pthagnar's arguments are consistent by his own standards. i'm trying to understand what those standards are, (assuming it's even possible to construct a reasonably consistent interpretation of his views) blowing his jokes out of all proportion in the process. it's always possible to give up playing the game of generality and say that X should be judged by different standards than Y because the X are my people, but at whatever points he does that, i might choose to respond, "well, the Y are my people." (but it's also possible to argue people into supporting different things, so) (edit: actually, i'm not sure how charitable it is to attribute tribalism to nietzsche. indirectly maybe, but nietzsche was usually in favor of greatness, which begs the question of why you think some people are great, leading you back into the world of consistency. then again, it's not like i read nietzsche particularly attentively, so i don't know.))

kill a commie
have children
pray a bit

to comfort your main anxiety: i am inconsistent. there are lots of terms for this, polite and rude.


wait, are you that indian fellow?

NE: also, until I said it just now, i didn't say you should  kill commies. I said that commies *want* to be killed. I guess if you think you should do something just because somebody, eg. a communist, wants you to do it, then this is a reason to do it, but I don't think this is a good reason to do something, especially coming from commies. DO YOU REALISE WHERE THAT PRIMROSE PATH LEADS?

once upon a time, perhaps christians wanted to be killed as much as commies nowadays do. this is def. not the case at present, though.

quoting Nortaneous:

:meatspin:)

FUCK

what is happening

nietzsche did not like tribalism. i thought pthag was talking about slave morality but apparently he is talking about the fact that christianity has undergone somewhere over 1500 but below 2000 years of being the Official Idea of several functioning civilizations, and has therefore lost the masochism it imparted into marxism to the forces of People Are Not So Stupid As To Think That Can Coexist With A Functioning Civilization

i would not expect the USSR to have had similar masochism, except maybe during the war when such a thing would have been useful

oh good it is gone now.

anyway i am reminded of the tale of Maoist Jeff, a SA marxoteen who lived somewhere in texas and thought all first-worlders, naturally including himself, should be killed, for Justice. he eventually disappeared from the internet in a manner that would be consistent with him enacting Justice on himself. it would not surprise me.