/fascist/ - Surf the Kali Yuga

Fascist and Third Position Discussion

Want your event posted here? Requests accepted in this /meta/ thread.

Max message length: 5120

Drag files to upload or
click here to select them

Maximum 5 files / Maximum size: 20.00 MB

More

(used to delete files and postings)


Open file (430.31 KB 480x321 linkola forest.png)
Open file (769.96 KB 2993x1691 ted and his cabin.jpg)
Open file (440.56 KB 464x730 ecofascism revolt.png)
Open file (1.05 MB 1500x2247 deep ecology reading.jpg)
Ecofascism, Tech Critical Blackshirt 04/29/2020 (Wed) 00:43:52 ID: 5c5f5b No.13
I think it would be best this time around to merge deep ecology and anti-tech into a single thread since there is so much overlap. Old thread archives: https://web.archive.org/web/20190804033752/https://8ch.net/fascist/res/13412.html https://archive.fo/XQMX7 CORE READING >Technological Slavery by Theodore J. Kaczynski (2019 edition) >The Technological Society by Jacques Ellul >Industrial Society and Its Future by Theodore J. Kaczynski >Anti-Tech Revolution: Why and How? by Theodore J. Kaczynski >Can Life Prevail? by Pentti Linkola >Man and Technics by Oswald Spengler >The Collapse of Complex Societies by Joseph A. Tainter A good channel with a lot of videos on Ted Kaczynski, Linkola and Ellul: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJIIMmCfJxBv5-jGTK3iIMw
>>8183 I'd be fine with non-White abortions. I mean sure it's nice to have a baby and all but like population numbers are a thing.
>>8183 >but I can at least understand aborting defectives (although I don't agree with it) Why should we strive to preserve defectives at all though? Starting from the hypothetical individual themselves we’re talking about, they exist in a state essentially worse than animal, just take a few moments to watch these videos and reflect on the quality of life that such people have. If I was reduced to this state, I would want to die: https://youtu.be/cyxFDwBuaXA https://youtu.be/j4PTf7LgsIE And then we have to think of the burden that is put on the parents by being forced to deal with such a person. And not just for eighteen or twenty years, but for likely most of their lives, especially in more severe cases like I have linked in the two videos above. And above the level of the family there is the burden incurred by the state and society at large in having to deal with people like this as well, and we can only imagine the financial burden of this. Disposing of such defective individuals is the most ancient form of eugenics. >I thought abortion was legal in all states? It is, but the laws vary depending on what state you’re in. In some states it is more strict than others and conservatives periodically try to make it as difficult as possible to actually get one, as close as they can to banning it without actually banning it. I’m sure this will keep happening until Roe v. Wade is turned over (doubtful). Here’s the law I was referencing by the way: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/down-syndrome-abortion-fight-ohio-takes-legal-twists-n1155276
>>7626 Non sequitur. Where do you draw the line? You assume that totally based people suddenly lose all interest for modern science and technology and want to live like hermits in caves? Are you going to rely on the hypocritical appreciation of tech like the Amish do? When Germans corrupt because they actually invented stuff? >>7626 >Sci-Fi movies and video games have rotted your brain. The real redpill is that there is little impressive about being able to manipulate matter Says the jaded one. If we wanted, we could build a good many things that come close to what is seen in hard science fiction. This goes even without talking about all the senseless gatekeeping managed by holders of patents. We do have robots. We do have laser cannons and coilguns. We do have tablets that hold millions worth of book in their memories, all accessed through ever moving screens. We do talk to people on the other side of the planet in near realtime. We do print impressive structures from plastic to biological compounds. We do send strange ships into the sky and beyond. We do have the power to create suns in the middle of nowhere that can level cities and scorch entire lands. We do have devices that can see through flesh and stone. If we were to refine all of this over the next century, at the same pace as we know now, and then roll it all into one big suit driven by a human, and were to send that back in time even to people who lived, say, 1000 years ago, would you tell me they would not be impressed, when on the other hand all they can obtain when praying is barely noticeable effects and lots of speculation? >>7631 You are talking of advances that are extremely young. We are still making refinements to sewer systems that became mainstream during Roman times. >>7633 >It should surprise no one here, but a large amount of popular tech shills are Jews. >large amount Jews hate Nature and revel in variants of technology that allow them to extract wealth in exchange of very little effort. Not that it's entirely a bad thing in itself, but in the rigged world we live in with those financial 0s and 1s, they will obviously regroup in financial technologies and related fields. Big data and legalized spying need not be obligatory. Nor is transhumanism. >>7634 >DNA splicing, etc it's all degenerate and we don't deserve until nature and the God(s) say we do. In certain myths regarding human origins, it seems we do come very close to DNA splicing written in different terms.
>>8212 >Are you going to rely on the hypocritical appreciation of tech like the Amish do? Hypocritical? You mean reasoned and intelligent application? The Amish are the masters of their technology. It bends to their will, they don't let it run rampant in their society and don't feel obligated to apply each and every new invention shit out by someone regardless of the consequences that it will have for their way of life and society. It's a mistake to think that Amish "reject technology". They are unashamedly selective, and this is why they are so interesting and worthy of admiration in this particular sense. For example, while cars are shunned, they will accept a ride in a car. They don't use telephones, but they'll keep a telephone in the barn. They'll use farm equipment, but only so long as it is able to pulled by a team of horses. These restrictions, it has been noted by some, have done a remarkably good job of keeping Amish society close-knit and healthier than the surrounding America. Read 'The Riddle of Amish Culture' by Donald Kraybill.
>>7639 >I love to poop behind bushes and get rekt by asteroids. >>8166 >>Tedious: >>building temples, cathedrals, castles and city-wide sewers didn't need organization(s) >>icehouses everywhere (fuck Meds) so let's freeze our asses off in repetitive pine woods covered in snow 200 days out of 365 >>let's be anarcho-ironites so when niggers come with guns given to them by kikes we will win because our ways are highly pure and of the greenest green Fucking aye! God knows why I didn't think of it already... >>8167 >>(same): >>centuries of continuous technological progress prior to the 17th century were achieved by depressive monks who didn't give a fuck about having better tools yet managed to build better tools just because before they suddenly liked having better tools in the 17th century and got excited about it and became degenerates And he killed people to give us this? Man... that's so fucked up.
>>8217 Go back to Cuckchan
>>8214 >masters of their technology. We did too not so long ago before ((we)) let all of it slip through our fingers. Besides, do you think every single one of them knows how to do and produce all their community uses and relies on? >bend it As if kikes had not infested our governments and academic centers to push for more unrestrained spread and use of tech, to better tag and document people, forcing more bureaucracy to facilitate greater taxation. We could have advanced technology for a small fraction of the useless hassle. >artificial technological cap Perhaps fine as long as the guys on the other side of the river play by the same rules. Otherwise you can only eat bullets and then cry, but decide to reject violence and revenge, mostly because you couldn't even enact it even if you wanted to, therefore settling on loving your enemy and hugging him. Until you're all dead because, you know, shit happens and being pacifists is not really an efficient way to guarantee your survival. Even our distant ancestors were not that foolish. >For example, while cars are shunned, they will accept a ride in a car. That's like saying you reject usury but let kikes practice it in your own town, right down the street. Or what? They go like "this ride sucks this ride sucks this ride sucks" in their heads until they get out of the car? Imagine if they ever were to... appreciate the ride! Then go for another ride, and another, etc. >They'll use farm equipment, but only so long as it is able to pulled by a team of horses. I suppose they extract and work all the iron by themselves. Same with paint and veneer, all Amish-produced? I also venture that they have books too. How are they produced? Where are they printed? The problem here with this thread is how ecofascism and inawoodz lifestyle is raised as the best model ever, when in fact if you want to go the Ted-Linkola way, there is no problem, it's fine, but don't ever think it bestows you some kind of moral ascendancy. You are simply adopting a simpler lifestyle that is simpler to manage and that's fine by itself. Period. >>8218 >wah wah
>>8223 >We did too not so long ago before ((we)) let all of it slip through our fingers Not so long ago? This problem is a worldwide problem that has its origins over two hundred years ago at this point. It slipped out of our hands before we even knew that something was wrong. Also, no one is advocating for pacifism here, so I'm not sure why you're alluding to it. That's like saying that just because one appreciates their lifestyle that one must like Christianity too. It's silly. Accepting car rides is no problem. They don't own the cars themselves. Cars have dis-embedding effects on a community and lead to its dispersal and the spread of individualism. It makes lots of sense to allow people to ride but not own. >I suppose they extract and work all the iron by themselves. Same with paint and veneer, all Amish-produced? No one claimed this. And back in the day they didn't even use this stuff, so they adapt to the extent that the community deems necessary. Again, they only avoid certain types of technology, and even this varies among Amish groups. Some use more than others.
>>8228 pretty palin >Not so long ago? This problem is a worldwide problem that has its origins over two hundred years ago at this point. >It slipped out of our hands before we even knew that something was wrong. The corruption was already nested in our countries, Jews and their liberal lackeys were there for more than two hundred years, it's correct, but it had not yet fully blossomed. It took several decades for the dark forces to show their entire face in broad daylight as the (((CFR/Globohomo))). All the high tech at some point was offhanded to the nips, as if it were an obligatory thing, only to pave the way to a full transfer of electronic technology to Asia in places where the idea of recycling and ecologism were and still are entirely unheard of. I'm certainly not saying it's a paradise here, we unfortunately have so many cases of big profiteers being reckless about the environment simply because there is a total derth of proper authority to jail them or hang them the way it should be done. But we simply cannot deny that there was a time when powerful computers and most of their components including the primary ones were built in the US and to a lesser extent in Europe. >Also, no one is advocating for pacifism here, so I'm not sure why you're alluding to it. The Amish are rather hot on it. It got to the point of being ridiculous when some retard went into one of their communities, entered some small building and killed something like five people. The rest of the story is embarrassing. >That's like saying that just because one appreciates their lifestyle that one must like Christianity too. It's silly. Not so much considering they're Anabaptists, therefore Christians. They include Christian principles in their way of life so whether you like it or not, if you appreciate it then you'll be certainly be appreciating these specifically Christian elements too. It's a rather mixed thing. >Accepting car rides is no problem. They don't own the cars themselves. Cars have dis-embedding effects on a community and lead to its dispersal and the spread of individualism. It makes lots of sense to allow people to ride but not own. If this is not confusing, I don't know what is. Picking on your telephone example, it clearly lies within one of their buildings. It might even be grounded to the line. By all means, they do own it, but they don't use it. Then, we have the case of the car which they use but do not own. It's absurd as their restriction only triggers when they both own and use some service or tool that's modern. It really sounds awkward. I'd rather they say yep, modern tech is fine in some ways, there's comfort and even fun in it, we have them devices because they can be useful sometimes, say literally helpful, but we prefer to reduce their use at close to none if possible because we prefer taking our time and using old school stuff, demonstrating every day our superior will over the electro-mechanical temptation; we call it [insert fancy zen name for their socialisto-discipline motto]. Many people already live that way btw, free of the hypocrisy, they're not full blown Amish.
>>8228 >No one claimed this. It's pretty much implied. Some of the tools I have been able to see are clearly not man-made. The topic about industrial and post-industrial technology is where one finds the hinge. On what basis could they object to the very existence of such industries other than claiming it's somewhat bad, or corrupting? They move goalposts with the ever growing "non-essential" excuse condition, which is even more hypocritical and quickly enters the pilpul dimension as one could look at all the things they use and could be declared non-essential. So planes, trains, boats, cars, buses and phones are non-essential until they suddenly become essential, i.e., practical. One of my favorites is this one: amishamerica.com/can-amish-fly/ >For the most part, Amish abstain from flying, though certain groups of Amish do permit it. Also, most Amish do allow air travel in extraordinary situations. >Amish objections to air travel are mainly based in the idea that air travel is not considered essential. Amish do make allowances for other forms of travel out of a recognition of a need to journey further than a horse-and-buggy allows. This may include visiting family in other settlements, sometimes out-of-state, or on business purposes. >Air travel may help a person arrive at a destination faster, but a car, bus, or other vehicle will get one there just the same. >Air travel is also expensive, symbolic of a fast-paced lifestyle, and connected with luxury and worldliness in the minds of many Amish. That's pretty much the way it's understood by 99% of the population too. Let's not get started on how they actually pay for these tickets. Obviously not with coins (which despite being the most primitive looking aspect of minting, are produced in factories because it's just faster and more convenient to do so). >Regardless of affiliation, most Amish permit flying in emergencies. This comes into play most often when accidents require rapid transport, often by helicopter, to distant hospitals. An Indiana Amishman described how his young son was transported to a hospital in Michigan after a serious buggy accident. Oh look, a flycopturr. Hey, lookie! A big hopital with tech and stuff. Wow, daddy, I'm being corrupted by the Machine God. amishamerica.com/how-do-amish-travel/ >Automobile-most Amish permit riding as a passenger in a car or bus, but not driving DONT TOUCH THE WHEEEEEL!!!1! >Bicycle and scooter-both are used by Amish, depending on the community >Rollerblades-rollerblades and skates are used as a form of recreation and short-distance travel in communities such as Lancaster County >Train-Amish take both long- and short-distance trips by rail >Boat and ship-Amish occasionally travel by boat, often for recreational purposes All man made. >amishamerica.com/how-do-amish-travel/amish-black-buggies/ Look at all these man made buggies! Totally honest LARPers.
>>8246 > It took several decades After WWII
>>8247 You're literally not worth talking to about the Amish if you don't understand why they do what they do. Read the book I recommended. "Muh LARP" shows that your brain is rotted by Cuckchan speak if you think that a group that has existed for centuries is "LARPing"
Daily reminder to have as many children as possible regardless of overpopulation concerns.
>>8510 those ten would be more beneficial to the environment than ten of that shitskin
I have a question why are kikes and niggers biologically so different that they always destroy their environment and exploit it until it's none sustainable their must be a logical reason for it.
If I can't find a girl that wants a dozen kids I will be very sad. >>8518 Niggers lack the capacity to postpone gratification for any significant period of time, or to plan ahead, solve complex problems or to conceive of anything more abstract and less tangible. They're like a goldfish compared to a high-quality White man, whose ancestors evolved in harsh environments where there was a selective advantage to all of the capacities listed above that niggers lacked. With this in mind, it is quite easy to see why niggers, once given access to modern technologies, destroy their countries and leave garbage and filth wherever they go. They can hardly understand why this is bad, or even if they do they don't care. Whites have of course brought a lot of environmental damage and waste into the world, but the difference with us is that we are able to comprehend that there is a problem, and put forward solutions which need to be adopted. The problem is of course the masses, which are addicted to their extravagant materialistic lifestyles and over-consumption, but with the proper government in place this can slowly be fixed and a truly green ethnostate will come into being more in tune with Nature. There would not be such thing as environmentalism or conservationism without the Völkisch movement, people like Madison Grant, etc.
Open file (206.54 KB 600x450 jew mosquito.gif)
Concerning Jews, I am less sure. But I do know that they themselves are a degenerate form of life, like all parasites are. Their only concern is to suck the blood out of other races, and lord over things in the here and now, they can plan ahead on how they will destroy the entire civilization, but it hardly occurs to them to think of what happens after they've destroyed the very foundation they've hitched their wagons to. Their materialistic worldview doesn't consider the consequences, they're hardwired to destroy other peoples for short term benefit alone
>>8520 >>8521 thank you for your response anon
>>8521 Can this mean that jews are THE enemy or one of the enemies?
>>8518 >implying Whites didn't pioneer the industrialization that has completely fucked up the world Salvaging what's left of our ecosystems isn't a racial issue. It's a sociopathic capitalism issue. The post above touches on some real issues but it's dangerously arrogant to believe that lack of delayed gratification is just for niggers. Even asian, jewish and White CEOs can't fucking do it. I would even say it's not about delayed gratification at all, it's about a human instinct of selfishness. That's how businesses often choose who succeeds and who has power. In most nations there are no regulations to stop a powerful company placing their leaders over the nations or peoples best interests.
Open file (20.54 KB 1033x598 jew eggs.png)
>>8542 >implying Whites didn't pioneer the industrialization that has completely fucked up the world See the third paragraph of >>8520. You're right though that capitalism is a key part of the problem. It isn't just destroying our environment, it's the key force behind globalization and mass immigration (Jews aside, obviously). The very logical of this system is anti-national. >>8541 There are multiple enemies of our people, the Jew sitting at the top of the hierarchy. Most of the lower levels of the pyramid are products having fallen under Jewish influence, either in origin, or through co-option and weaponization of once independent ideas and movements. For example, environmentalism was co-opted by Jews and watered down into a kosher variant that involves no more than slapping green stickers on consumer products and telling the goyim to recycle their plastic. Or to look back even further, the complaints of workers towards capitalists regarding low pay, dangerous conditions and long work hours was weaponized by people like (((Marx))) into a revolutionary internationalist ideology. It never had to be so, but it was co-opted and turned into a golem. A final example is the "struggles" of other races against Whites. Again the Jew supplies the intellectual backing, the funding and the propaganda, and places himself firmly at the head of their movements. I'm not saying that literally every ill we have is the fault of the Jews or that the world would become a utopia if we removed them, but they are the greatest enemy of our race and have been for over two thousand years at this point.
>>8250 >cuckchan cuckchan cu-cu-cu-cuckchan! Good arguments there m8. They're total hypocrites, changing their moral sets when they find the industrial advantages of modern life more convenient. If you're going to have a negative moral judgement on the post-industrial technological achievements, then you're ought to be coherent with such ideas. For fuck sake, that's like saying you're against pedophilia but sometimes it feels good to shoot your stuff into a kid's anus when there's no one else around to stuff. It's like Christcucks who stand against usury (muh whipping saviuh) but actually let kikes do it on their own Christian lands. >>8510 Nice kids but I don't think it's a sustainable model. We need cannon fodder though so it's still better today to have more of them. >>8520 > They're like a goldfish Goldfish can actually swim. >Whites have of course brought a lot of environmental damage and waste into the world Most of it comes from Asia and Africa, and only a very few oligarchs are perfectly happy wrecking the environment. If one thing is sure is the huge quantity of eco-friendly people found from the left to the right. >>8521 They actually think they can rule the world but since they're incapable of realizing their parasitic nature, they cannot foresee the tragic consequence of their warped will to power. >>8548 >I'm not saying that literally every ill we have is the fault of the Jews or that the world would become a utopia if we removed them, They surely did all they could to destroy the one system of government that would have solved all the problems. Of course, it included solving the JQ so...
Open file (4.58 MB 720x1280 JzlQq6X.mp4)
>>8510 Absolutely. I care about the environment primarily for the well being of my future descendants. I do a lot of work to help the environment, and I will teach my kids to do the same. >>8518 Jews are greedy and simply don't care if they destroy the environment so long as they get money out of it. They will continue to exploit the planet until there are no resources left, down to the very last shekel. Niggers, many other shit skins and White trash are stupid, lazy, careless and trashy. I notice they frequently litter, probably because they're lazy, just don't care or they expect someone else will clean it up. I always imagine these types having piles of trash in their living space and being completely fine with it all piling up. And like >>8520 pretty much said, they are exploitative and over-consumptive because they seek instant gratification.
>>8548 >Again the Jew supplies the intellectual backing, the funding and the propaganda, and places himself firmly at the head of their movements. Yeah that's quite funny. It can be interesting to see nonWhites lead their own movements.
Open file (1.08 MB 1920x1280 girl flower.jpg)
>>8554 >Absolutely. I care about the environment primarily for the well being of my future descendants. I do a lot of work to help the environment, and I will teach my kids to do the same. Based. Sacrificing the future for the present is degenerate, just as is sacrificing the well-being of the collective for the desires of individuals. I'd like to do more work to actually help the environment. I live very frugally compared to the average person and occasionally try to grow some stuff out back but it's really not as much as I'd like. Let me know if you know some things that people should be doing. Of course I do want to cut back even more in the future and go off the grid, especially before I have a family. I think it would be much better for their development to live away from all this shit around today. >I notice they frequently litter, probably because they're lazy, just don't care or they expect someone else will clean it up. I always imagine these types having piles of trash in their living space and being completely fine with it all piling up I've noticed the same things. I think you're spot on when it comes to why they might do this. I've honestly never entered the house of a nigger in my over twenty years of life so far, so I can only imagine that they live in squalor, given the fact that their neighborhoods when black-dominated are more often than not littered with garbage and filth. If they can't care for the outside of their home, I doubt they can the inside. In my own neighborhood the nigger houses are always easy to spot, and when a formerly White-owned house gets blacked it almost always ends up in shambles within a year. Same for most non-Whites in my area, I've noticed.
>>8584 >most non-Whites You're telling me that there's a few that actually try to not pollute the environment? Wow what a reality.
Open file (4.28 MB 4592x3056 1600487490648.jpg)
>>8584 >Let me know if you know some things that people should be doing. Like you mentioned, living frugally and consuming less is a great start, especially while we live in times of over-population. I can share a short list of practical and simple things I personally do to help the environment that most other people can try applying in their lives. 1. Collect a variety of fruit and tree seeds and toss them around non-forested areas, essentially doing the same work that birds and other animals do to spread seeds around. I find this is much easier than trying to grow and plant trees from seed. 2. If you go out hiking or exploring nature, take a trash bag and collect some litter along the way. I used to get frustrated at the idiots that littered innawoods, and angrily pass by the litter, but I feel much better when I actually clean it up knowing that it won't be there anymore. 3. One thing you can do at home (in secret, don't tell your boomer parents) is to collect urine in sealable jugs or containers, let it sit for a week to sterilize, mix it with an equal amount of water, and use it as a natural liquid fertilzer. Urine contains many beneficial elements for plants. 4. Composting toilets for solid human waste. Flush toilets use up gallons of water, whereas composting toilets use sawdust or woodchips to cover up solid waste. I don't have one but plan to use them in the future. 5. Instead of having a mowed grass lawn, let it grow semi-wild and introduce artificial habitats for all kinds of creatures, from microorganisms, to insects, to larger animals. Just try to mimic different types of ecosystems and biomes, creating microclimates, patches of land with wildflowers, grasses, big and little rocks, logs, wet areas, dry areas, shaded areas, sunny areas, etc. This is the funnest part IMO because you can get really creative with it and it's generally low maintenance. I have a small garden in the middle of my parent's mowed lawn and it's really amazing to see how many different species just a tiny area of land can support with assorted microclimates, compared to the rest of the lawn. Habitat destruction is a huge problem today, and although we can't effectively fix the habitats destroyed by intense urban development, many of us can improve the habitats in our yards. 6. Hunting, foraging, fishing, growing your own food and raising your own animals (as mentioned earlier ITT) or at least buying food from local farms. Don't buy food that needs to be transported from distant lands. >occasionally try to grow some stuff out back but it's really not as much as I'd like Same here, I grow veggies in my small garden but still need to get like 99% of my food from the grocery store.
>>8665 >let it sit for a week to sterilize a) sure about that duration? b) is it bad if I pee on pees directly? >Composting toilets for solid human waste Yeah but the smell and where to put that stuff afterwards if you're in a semiurban area? Are there services known to collect this? >Instead of having a mowed grass lawn Come on golf courses in the desert are fantastic! >raising your own animals Pic related >>8665
Open file (554.99 KB 1280x1024 girl flower smell.jpg)
>>8665 Thanks for the all of the tips, anon. A few of these, such as #2 is really something that I need to start doing, because I have felt the same way whenever I am out in the woods. There are all sorts of beer bottles, plastic cups and sorts of trash scattered about that always gets on my nerves, but like you I haven't really done anything about it. I will have to though. Some of the other stuff also look like good tips, but are obviously not as doable when one is (for now, at least) trapped in the suburbs where there are all sorts of restrictions and regulations on what you can do and what your yard has to look like, unfortunately. The composting toilet in particular seems like a great and really cheap way to deal with getting rid of and utilizing human-waste in an efficient way. I will really need to explore a lot of this stuff in a lot more depth, because I'd like to be living as cheaply as possible with as little attachment to the system as possible, as barebone as that would be.
Forgot a vid I wanted to post of some composting toilets that some anons may be interested in: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqbYohdTGzo
Which way, White man?
Open file (494.01 KB 1024x575 hobbithouse01.jpg)
>>8689 >a) sure about that duration? No, honesty. But I've been doing it for the past 2 years and have only seen great results, and I've never gotten sick after eating my own veggies. Supposedly by letting it sit for a week, the ammonia in urine self-sterilizes it and kills any pathogens. >b) is it bad if I pee on pees directly? Yes, for most young and small plants it's too concentrated and should be diluted with at least an equal part of water. >the smell and where to put that stuff afterwards if you're in a semiurban area? The smell isn't really that bad if you mask your poo with enough wood shavings. As for living in a semi-urban area, I guess composting toilets would only be appropriate if you can keep a compost pile far enough from neighbors and passerbys who might smell it. >Pic related Heh, you're right. Lolis are animals too. >>8715 Good video. It shouldn't be too hard to make one with some plywood, a seat and a bucket. >>8813 Obviously the top frame is ideal. I never understood how anyone would want to live in those apartment complexes. The only reasons I can think to live in those would be the closeness to stores, work, and friends - making it very convenient to consume.
Open file (107.53 KB 385x400 dugout 3.jpg)
Open file (60.47 KB 564x370 dugout 2.jpg)
Open file (58.49 KB 400x300 dugout comfy.JPG)
>>8900 Dugouts are the comfiest type of house
Can one of you redpill me about the Roman way of living? I've rumors that Romans were lived in shitty homes and that their urban way of life was way worst than muh mudhuts. Can you also btfo medniggers that Nordics didn't live in mudhuts? Because I've saw some kiketube channels that specifically talks about how the nords and celts lived in homes such as roundhouses.
>>8936 >I've rumors that Romans were lived in shitty homes and that their urban way of life was way worst than muh mudhuts Yes, they were called insulae (singular: insula). They were basically shitty brick tenements and they packed as many people as possible into them, dumping their garbage and shit into the streets: > We know for a fact that the tenement houses were not well built: their foundations were not sunk to the proper depth on account of the swampy nature of the subsoil; their front walls were only a foot and a half thick, and patched up with sun-dried bricks. Such houses were only capable of one story above the ground. >The spontaneous collapse of the tenement houses was such a common occurrence that nobody paid attention to it, an event which would fill our newspapers with a thrilling subject for days and days. The fall of some cottages, attended with loss of life, is related by Cicero as an item hardly worthy of serious remark. Seneca depicts the tenants of popular houses as fearing at the same time to be buried or burnt alive. There were companies formed for the purpose of propping and sustaining " in the air" houses, the foundations of which had to be strengthened. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25118661 >Nords and Celts Here's what I found in Tacitus' Germania (16): >It is well known that the nations of Germany have no cities, and that they do not even tolerate closely contiguous dwellings. They live scattered and apart, just as a spring, a meadow, or a wood has attracted them. Their villages they do not arrange in our fashion, with the buildings connected and joined together, but every person surrounds his dwelling with an open space, either as a precaution against the disasters of fire, or because they do not know how to build. No use is made by them of stone or tile; they employ timber for all purposes, rude masses without ornament or attractiveness. Some parts of their buildings they stain more carefully with a clay so clear and bright that it resembles painting, or a coloured design. They are wont also to dig out subterranean caves, and pile on them great heaps of dung, as a shelter from winter and as a receptacle for the year's produce, for by such places they mitigate the rigour of the cold. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0083%3Achapter%3D16
>>8937 I think this was a problem across all med and West Asian civilization on their housings being awful to live in and thus they either contracted diseases daily or lived very short lives due to poor hygenie and generally poor living. I'll never understand why niggers think that they lived better than Nords, when Nords barely had stone in their respective lands along with the forbiddence of deforestation and yet they had a better diet and condition of living than meds. Medcucks lived like slaves and were slaves of empires while Nords had a sense of freedom.
>>8938 Because medcucks and levantineniggers are jealous of Europeans. Nords and Celts lived in awful conditions during the Ice Age of Europe which is why they never had something like a civilization, which in reality is nothing special and leads to the worst to come of humanity. Meds in reality heavily depended on trading and farming to get their civilizations going. Even though Northern Europeans lived in awful conditions and didn't have large empires such as Rome, they still became some of the greatest warriors that Caesar and Alexander dared not to challenge and used as mercenaries for their campaigns. Deforestation led to collapsed, tight and large urban centers lead to diseases, high crime rates, materialism, and hedonism, and farming lead to more environment destruction which made farming invaluable in many areas and places. Mediterraneans had a warmer climate and were connected to a sea where there were other civilizations that were warm and green and had plenty of resources to dig out of, it had nothing to do with stupidity or backwardness it had everything to do with geography and climate.
>>8937 Thanks for this my nigger.
>>8938 >I'll never understand why niggers think that they lived better than Nords They are just arrogant. They see all of the grand cities and buildings of the ancient Mediterranean and they act like they are the hottest shit that has ever existed. While Greece and Rome definitely did bring many great things into the world, they were certainly not perfect, indulged in some forms of degeneracy, and, as you kinda hint at, most of them lived in shitty conditions and spontaneously collapsing tenement blocks away from the soil. While undeniably less complex in a material sense, Germanic peoples at the time were living a more natural life and were far more impeccable in terms of virtue (as Tacitus admits).
>>8939 >it had nothing to do with stupidity or backwardness I don't see how anyone can say that, unless they didn't read what Roman historians like tacticus had stated that he finds the Germans to be some of the wisest people. Hell I'm a bit hazy but I think some Greeks even admired the Celts and Germans and even also said they were very wise along with the Scythians who were highly admired by the Greeks. Civilization is and building architecture is not a measure of intelligence.
>>8937 > their front walls were only a foot and a half thick Holy f. That's like luxury today.
>>8939 Rome was by far one of the cleanest places on this planet. The problem is the hordes of slaves and migrants brought in as cheap labor, requiring quick and cheap housing.
>>9041 Roman roads, aqueducts, and public buildings are rightly famous, but they also had an effective sewer system, eg the Cloaca Maxima of Rome. as for housing, it varied considerably. the urban poor were crowded into shoddily built tenements, but wealthier Romans had houses and villas. the typical design of a domus would have the outer wall & door next to the street, with a courtyard on the inside.
No literally Rome was not the cleanest place at all, none of these things stopped poor hygiene nor numerous amounts of diseases and parasite from contacting. They had used things like urine, unclean aqueducts, disgusting toilets, unclean and sanitized sponges in public bath houses due to overcrowding, poverty, etc. The also Romans stole the roads system from the celts. And their bath houses (which I think also might of came some other culture), aqueducts, sewage system aren't an example of good hygiene otherwise Brazil would be the cleanest place on Earth.
>>9115 >Roman roads, aqueducts, and public buildings are rightly famous, but they also had an effective sewer system, eg the Cloaca Maxima of Rome. Wrong, see links https://www.ancient-origins.net/news-history-archaeology/why-romans-were-not-quite-clean-you-might-have-thought-005141 https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2016/01/ancient-roman-toilets-gross/423072/ These things didn't prevent the lack of sanitation nor the Roman people and slaves from obtaining diseases that either originated in Italy or came from places far away from Rome. Historians consider Rome to be clean and the most sanitized empire in the antique world, because of the existence of the public structures that were seen to keep Rome clean and healthy from all types of viruses and parasitic bacteria within their water supply and food along with some legislation being passed that were enforced to keep Romans from getting sick from the aqueducts and sewers, when in reality the Romans failed to keep their public bathhouses and toilets filthy. This one of the major reasons why Rome fell, because their negligence led to major outbreaks of diseases spreading all across the empire which led to depopulation and revolts weakening the empire once again. I can also talk about how deforestation and other harms the Romans had done to their environments which also led to their decline and fall and improper hygiene. TLDR, The Romans faced dire consequences from their overpopulation, rapid urbanization, and environmental destruction all across the Italian pennisula.
>>9119 >Romans stole the roads system from the celts Perhaps in form but the actual good roads were complex and multi-layered from different materials to withstand climate and to be tolerable to walk, hence why some of them exists to this day. They required tons of manpower and capable engineers depending on the terrain so i don't think the celts reached such heights in road making. >And their bath houses They are most probably from the Minoans aka ancient island greeks, which then were copied by many other types of greeks in the mainland. >aqueducts and sewage system aren't an example of good hygiene Perhaps he meant good urban cleanliness, which is still a factor in personal hygiene but won't stop somebody from getting the crabs. Expecting ancient Rome to have the sanitization levels of a modern mid-level city is a bit overplaying the cards but they weren't pajeet town either.
>>9138 On the roads things he's referring to an author named Graham Robb, who claimed that the celts were actually just as advanced or more advanced than the Romans in his book called The Ancient Paths: Discovering the Lost Map of Celtic Europe. https://www.thevintagenews.com/2016/04/23/roman-roads-were-actually-built-by-the-celts-so-says-a-new-book/
>>9119 hellolleh >And their bath houses (which I think also might of came some other culture), aqueducts, sewage system aren't an example of good hygiene otherwise Brazil would be the cleanest place on Earth. Which actually highlights that Romans were not the problem, and that these problems were strictly found in downtrodden areas full of the soiled ones. I remember that up to the 70s, even Paris had disgusting slums. Yet the rest of the city was offering a quality of life of the highest standard. >>9129 >ancient-origins.net ? >The ancient Romans’ sanitation structures may not actually have been that sanitary, at least by our modern standards, says Ann Olga Koloski-Ostrow, a professor of classical studies at Brandeis University who has been visiting and studying Roman sewers and latrines for more than 40 years. Clearly the Romans still decided they were a necessity. I think the idea she misses is how the lack of such commodities would have make the situation worse. >“In my explorations of public toilets, I have concluded that they must have been pretty dirty places—excrement and urine on the seats and floor, poor lighting … Surely, not someplace one would want to spend much time,” she wrote to me in an email. >Koloski-Ostrow noted that while the toilets didn’t necessarily have a negative effect on public health, researchers should be careful about saying they had a positive effect. So after 40 years of studying Roman toilets, she hasn't found one ounce of evidence that the dirtiness created health issues. >“While the arrival of public latrines in Roman Italy probably did improve the sanitary conditions of cities to some extent, we must not automatically assume that sanitary improvement was the one, the only, or the main Roman motive behind the construction of toilets,” she wrote. So it actually did help improve the sanitary conditions after all... Looks like the journalist was just fishing for cheap gotchas and cherry picked his own material. >She also suspects that sewers like the Cloaca Maxima were not built with human waste removal in mind, but to help drain standing water from cities. A completely cheap claim. So the shit just happened to conveniently be flushable throughout this network, but it was a miraculous happenstance. Even if urine and fecal matters weren't part of the initial design, there is proof nevertheless of an intent of making the city much cleaner. Now, what are the chances that nobody would have thought that it might be a good idea to use this to flush pee and shit at the same time?
If we go to the scientific paper, we read the following: cambridge.org/core/journals/parasitology/article/human-parasites-in-the-roman-world-health-consequences-of-conquering-an-empire/6464BDBB5D4B8EC0B08C503B6ECD1B7B >Despite their large multi-seat public latrines with washing facilities, sewer systems, sanitation legislation, fountains and piped drinking water from aqueducts, we see the widespread presence of whipworm (Trichuris trichiura), roundworm (Ascaris lumbricoides) and Entamoeba histolytica that causes dysentery. This would suggest that the public sanitation measures were insufficient to protect the population from parasites spread by fecal contamination. Yet worms are largely spread through what larger organisms ingest. >Ectoparasites such as fleas, head lice, body lice, pubic lice and bed bugs were also present, and delousing combs have been found. They're tough creatures and even current toilets are absolutely irrelevant against them. >The evidence fails to demonstrate that the Roman culture of regular bathing in the public baths reduced the prevalence of these parasites. Fish tapeworm was noted to be widely present, and was more common than in Bronze and Iron Age Europe. It is possible that the Roman enthusiasm for fermented, uncooked fish sauce (garum) may have facilitated the spread of this helminth. We have our culprit here. For this one, nothing to do with toilets! And now let's look at the other parasites. i went to wiki for quick notes. >Ascaris lumbricoides, a roundworm, infects humans via the fecal-oral route. >When an embryonated egg is ingested, a Rhabditiform larva hatches then penetrates the wall of the gastrointestinal tract and enters the blood stream. From there, it is carried to the liver and heart, and enters pulmonary circulation to break free in the alveoli, where it grows and molts. In three weeks, the larva passes from the respiratory system to be coughed up, swallowed, and thus reaches the small intestine, where it matures to an adult male or female worm. Fertilization can now occur and the female produces as many as 200,000 eggs per day for 12–18 months. These fertilized eggs become infectious after two weeks in soil; they can persist in soil for 10 years or more. Right. Put feces on your face, lick it or touch your unclean fingers, and you're good to go. The only way the toilets could be held responsible here would be because of a lack of people cleaning their hands or any surface where shit landed. Obviously Romans didn't care about touching someone else' drying feces or sitting where crap was splashed all around the pee hole. >The female T. trichiura produces 2,000–10,000 single-celled eggs per day. Eggs are deposited from human feces to soil where, after two to three weeks, they become embryonated and enter the "infective" stage. These embryonated infective eggs are ingested and hatch in the human small intestine exploiting the intestinal microflora as hatching stimulus. Weeks before the eggs become infectious. In other words, nothing to do with fecal matter present on the latrines, but more to do with grown food not being properly cleaned and also exposed to the manure. So you could have the cleanest toilets in the world, it would not change a thing about the infection method if you were not clean enough about how you grew your own food. As for Entamoeba histolytica, the lack of proper cleaning of surfaces in shared spaces would allow for the spreading of this parasite. Yet the scientific paper reminds the reader that the Romans installed >large multi-seat public latrines with washing facilities >>9142 Romans took the armor design from the Gaulish Celts iirc.
>>9157 Except the problem was the Romans, and you're using two entirely types of cities. Rome was overcrowded, filled with slaves from all across the world and mass poverty. Paris has a higher quality of life, because they manage their cities better due to modern science of understanding bacteria and medicine that could prevent viruses from entering in and out of the city. How is the slothful and unhealthy culture of the Romans along with shoving as many people as you can within one city, not the fault of the Romans?

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms
Delete
Report

Captcha (required for reports and bans by board staff)

no cookies?