The Falsity of Modern Morality

[Aldarion]

World War 2 has basically created modern morality. Problem is, that morality and the conditions it was created in are nothing but smoke and mirrors.

The narrative of World War 2 is basically that of a black-and-white struggle between good and evil. Essentially Free West against Sauron, except this Sauron has absolutely no redeeming qualities unlike the original.

Problem is, that narrative is bullshit - and so is the worldview created by it.

NatSocs and Fascists were evil, yes - but their enemies were not good. Soviet Union, one of major Allied powers, was essentially responsible for German rearmament and thus responsible for the Second World War. Communism itself was a genocidal ideology. And the western Allies were not exactly nice themselves - concentration camps, mass murder etc. were done on all sides. Difference was that Nazis and Communists had as their goal genocide, but in the end - World War II was at best "black and gray" in moral terms, and there was black on both sides.

Yet somehow the "black and white" narrative I had described before had gained traction. Nazi crimes were focused on so much that Communist crimes flew under the radar, or got excused. "But you see, we didn't mean to murder those milions of people, it was a mistake, honest".

And this is a problem, because it also affected the understanding of how said genocides came to be in the first place. "Nazism" and "Fascism" were upheld as ultimate evils while Communism was ignored - and this allowed the Left to bury and conceal the crucial role that socialism had played in causing the genocide. "Nationalism" became a go-to scarecrow, while "socialism" is seen as something perhaps misguided, but ultimately harmless - when the opposite is far closer to the truth, though not entirely true either.

But the main issue is that it created a tendency towards absolutist solutions and away from balancing. As I described in another thread:

• If you implement liberty of no borders, you have to remove liberty of personal choice and freedom from spying - simply because multicultural societies are inherently murderous.
• If you want to maintain personal liberties, you have to maintain well-protected and at least culturally (ideally also ethnically) homogeneous society... which can only be maintained by denying liberty of migration.
• If you want to implement tolerance, you have to remove all liberties... the only way for no conflict to happen is if nobody has any liberty.
• If you want to maintain liberty in your personal life, you cannot tolerate somebody trying to come into your personal life without invitation.

It is a balancing act, and answer for each society will be different based on its cultural, historical and geopolitical characteristics.

Yet the World Wars created notion that there is an absolute morality, that "ideal" answers and solutions can be reached and that said answers can then be implemented across any and all societies worldwide, regardless of their sociocultural and historical characteristics.

But this entire construct is now falling apart, and we are yet to see how bloody its downfall will end up being.

Or as poster says:

 

[ATP]

World War 2 has basically created modern morality. Problem is, that morality and the conditions it was created in are nothing but smoke and mirrors.

The narrative of World War 2 is basically that of a black-and-white struggle between good and evil. Essentially Free West against Sauron, except this Sauron has absolutely no redeeming qualities unlike the original.

Problem is, that narrative is bullshit - and so is the worldview created by it.

NatSocs and Fascists were evil, yes - but their enemies were not good. Soviet Union, one of major Allied powers, was essentially responsible for German rearmament and thus responsible for the Second World War. Communism itself was a genocidal ideology. And the western Allies were not exactly nice themselves - concentration camps, mass murder etc. were done on all sides. Difference was that Nazis and Communists had as their goal genocide, but in the end - World War II was at best "black and gray" in moral terms, and there was black on both sides.

Yet somehow the "black and white" narrative I had described before had gained traction. Nazi crimes were focused on so much that Communist crimes flew under the radar, or got excused. "But you see, we didn't mean to murder those milions of people, it was a mistake, honest".

And this is a problem, because it also affected the understanding of how said genocides came to be in the first place. "Nazism" and "Fascism" were upheld as ultimate evils while Communism was ignored - and this allowed the Left to bury and conceal the crucial role that socialism had played in causing the genocide. "Nationalism" became a go-to scarecrow, while "socialism" is seen as something perhaps misguided, but ultimately harmless - when the opposite is far closer to the truth, though not entirely true either.

But the main issue is that it created a tendency towards absolutist solutions and away from balancing. As I described in another thread:

Yet the World Wars created notion that there is an absolute morality, that "ideal" answers and solutions can be reached and that said answers can then be implemented across any and all societies worldwide, regardless of their sociocultural and historical characteristics.

But this entire construct is now falling apart, and we are yet to see how bloody its downfall will end up being.

Or as poster says:

True,entire WW2 myth is one big lie.They do not fight for freedom,but for USA and soviets to partition world between them.
And when USA was simply no good,soviets was pure evil.

To be honest,we poles could capitulate in 1939,go to german factories work there,and result for us would be exactly the same.

And that narration is falling now.Nazis now are not germans,or even people who follow NSDAP like parties,but dudes which we do not like.

 

[Cherico]

The world wars tramatized the west.

In a very fundamental way these two events relatively close together basically just wreaked the west as a whole, and to be perfectly honest I don't think were going to get an objective look at it this century, I think the next century after the current ineligencia has been replaced with something less out of control. I think then you will see a more measured look at it.

But right now were still working through it.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

World War 2 has basically created modern morality. Problem is, that morality and the conditions it was created in are nothing but smoke and mirrors.

The narrative of World War 2 is basically that of a black-and-white struggle between good and evil. Essentially Free West against Sauron, except this Sauron has absolutely no redeeming qualities unlike the original.

Problem is, that narrative is bullshit - and so is the worldview created by it.

NatSocs and Fascists were evil, yes - but their enemies were not good. Soviet Union, one of major Allied powers, was essentially responsible for German rearmament and thus responsible for the Second World War. Communism itself was a genocidal ideology. And the western Allies were not exactly nice themselves - concentration camps, mass murder etc. were done on all sides. Difference was that Nazis and Communists had as their goal genocide, but in the end - World War II was at best "black and gray" in moral terms, and there was black on both sides.

Yet somehow the "black and white" narrative I had described before had gained traction. Nazi crimes were focused on so much that Communist crimes flew under the radar, or got excused. "But you see, we didn't mean to murder those milions of people, it was a mistake, honest".

And this is a problem, because it also affected the understanding of how said genocides came to be in the first place. "Nazism" and "Fascism" were upheld as ultimate evils while Communism was ignored - and this allowed the Left to bury and conceal the crucial role that socialism had played in causing the genocide. "Nationalism" became a go-to scarecrow, while "socialism" is seen as something perhaps misguided, but ultimately harmless - when the opposite is far closer to the truth, though not entirely true either.

But the main issue is that it created a tendency towards absolutist solutions and away from balancing. As I described in another thread:

Yet the World Wars created notion that there is an absolute morality, that "ideal" answers and solutions can be reached and that said answers can then be implemented across any and all societies worldwide, regardless of their sociocultural and historical characteristics.

But this entire construct is now falling apart, and we are yet to see how bloody its downfall will end up being.

Or as poster says:

One man's Heaven is another man's Hell. Honestly this seemingly fact about human nature brings up questions about the nature of Heaven and Hell that I can't even begin to answer.

 

[Bassoe]

I think there's a simpler explanation, that the modern neoliberal world still commits all the sins which it justifies its existence by claiming to prevent.

Colonialism and imperialism? The glowies have seeming never met a foreign goverment they didn't want to coup. Dictatorial goverments ruling against the popular will? It's becoming increasingly clear that democracy is meaningless long as oligarchical puppets with identical policies are the only candidates. Pointless unprovoked wars of aggression against the global south? Absolutely! Slavery? The whole propaganda apparatus clap like trained seals to the sight of an entire demographic being kidnapped off the streets. Genocide? Where do we even begin...

All neoliberalism's supposed moral superiority actually appears to be is blood libel held against its own poorer citizens, saying that "you don't deserve a good quality of life because the people who ruled over your ancestors oppressed foreigners."

 

[A'lan mandragon]

World War 2 has basically created modern morality. Problem is, that morality and the conditions it was created in are nothing but smoke and mirrors.

The narrative of World War 2 is basically that of a black-and-white struggle between good and evil. Essentially Free West against Sauron, except this Sauron has absolutely no redeeming qualities unlike the original.

Problem is, that narrative is bullshit - and so is the worldview created by it.

NatSocs and Fascists were evil, yes - but their enemies were not good. Soviet Union, one of major Allied powers, was essentially responsible for German rearmament and thus responsible for the Second World War. Communism itself was a genocidal ideology. And the western Allies were not exactly nice themselves - concentration camps, mass murder etc. were done on all sides. Difference was that Nazis and Communists had as their goal genocide, but in the end - World War II was at best "black and gray" in moral terms, and there was black on both sides.

Yet somehow the "black and white" narrative I had described before had gained traction. Nazi crimes were focused on so much that Communist crimes flew under the radar, or got excused. "But you see, we didn't mean to murder those milions of people, it was a mistake, honest".

And this is a problem, because it also affected the understanding of how said genocides came to be in the first place. "Nazism" and "Fascism" were upheld as ultimate evils while Communism was ignored - and this allowed the Left to bury and conceal the crucial role that socialism had played in causing the genocide. "Nationalism" became a go-to scarecrow, while "socialism" is seen as something perhaps misguided, but ultimately harmless - when the opposite is far closer to the truth, though not entirely true either.

But the main issue is that it created a tendency towards absolutist solutions and away from balancing. As I described in another thread:

Yet the World Wars created notion that there is an absolute morality, that "ideal" answers and solutions can be reached and that said answers can then be implemented across any and all societies worldwide, regardless of their sociocultural and historical characteristics.

But this entire construct is now falling apart, and we are yet to see how bloody its downfall will end up being.

Or as poster says:

Nonesense real morality says both Hitler and Stalin were evil and a substantial amount of us know this. The issue is the establishment shouts such correct men down. It isn't an argument of whether fascism or communism is the way,it's an argument that both are evil and honorable men can and will stand and kill both sides of the coin of Satan.

 

[A'lan mandragon]

One man's Heaven is another man's Hell. Honestly this seemingly fact about human nature brings up questions about the nature of Heaven and Hell that I can't even begin to answer.

Bullsh*t men who view heaven as hell are simply weak and pathetic men. They are pissed that strong men who succeed regardless of obstacles and thus get pussy do so. Have the will, discipline,and capacity to be successful men. It's really that simple but I am sure you will deny such a since in the modern world. It's very popular to make excuses for frankly inherently interior people failing in any given endeavor.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

Bullsh*t men who view heaven as hell are simply weak and pathetic men. They are pissed that strong men who succeed regardless of obstacles and thus get pussy do so. Have the will, discipline,and capacity to be successful men. It's really that simple but I am sure you will deny such a since in the modern world. It's very popular to make excuses for frankly inherently interior people failing in any given endeavor.

Dude take it down a notch. all I'm saying is different people like different environments. Some people thrive with a plow while others thrive with a hammer and anvil. Heck even the scriptures say that different people have different talents. I mean the church is compared to a body for crying outloud.

 

[Aldarion]

Nonesense real morality says both Hitler and Stalin were evil and a substantial amount of us know this. The issue is the establishment shouts such correct men down. It isn't an argument of whether fascism or communism is the way,it's an argument that both are evil and honorable men can and will stand and kill both sides of the coin of Satan.

Real morality, yes.

But I'm talking about narrative here. As in, stuff that you learn in school, that media promotes.

Do try to understand what you are replying to before screaming "nonsense".

I think there's a simpler explanation, that the modern neoliberal world still commits all the sins which it justifies its existence by claiming to prevent.

Colonialism and imperialism? The glowies have seeming never met a foreign goverment they didn't want to coup. Dictatorial goverments ruling against the popular will? It's becoming increasingly clear that democracy is meaningless long as oligarchical puppets with identical policies are the only candidates. Pointless unprovoked wars of aggression against the global south? Absolutely! Slavery? The whole propaganda apparatus clap like trained seals to the sight of an entire demographic being kidnapped off the streets. Genocide? Where do we even begin...

All neoliberalism's supposed moral superiority actually appears to be is blood libel held against its own poorer citizens, saying that "you don't deserve a good quality of life because the people who ruled over your ancestors oppressed foreigners."

Exactly.

 

[A'lan mandragon]

Dude take it down a notch. all I'm saying is different people like different environments. Some people thrive with a plow while others thrive with a hammer and anvil. Heck even the scriptures say that different people have different talents. I mean the church is compared to a body for crying outloud.

No I will say what is true regardless of what fools believe period

 

[A'lan mandragon]

Dude take it down a notch. all I'm saying is different people like different environments. Some people thrive with a plow while others thrive with a hammer and anvil. Heck even the scriptures say that different people have different talents. I mean the church is compared to a body for crying outloud.

What people like is entirely irrelevant,I am in no way required to adhere to the nonsense morality of others.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

No I will say what is true regardless of what fools believe period

And what above have I said that's untruthful?

 

[A'lan mandragon]

And what above have I said that's untruthful?

That I need to "chill" for one l, no I don't I am entirely capable and justified in objecting to "subjective"morality.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

That I need to "chill" for one l, no I don't I am entirely capable and justified in objecting to "subjective"morality.

You know what I've seen some of your other posts. Just forget it. For your sake I hope you have a peaceful and blessed life.

 

[A'lan mandragon]

Arguments for why communism evil? Sure a minimum of 100 million dead people in less then a century. Acrossed every rac,inhabited continent, and base civilization that humanity possesses. Compared to the death toll of not only fascism but every ideology ever including all of religion not equaling said numbers. So why is fascism considered worse then Marxism which was literally the original argument?

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

Arguments for why communism evil? Sure a minimum of 100 million dead people in less then a century. Acrossed every rac,inhabited continent, and base civilization that humanity possesses. Compared to the death toll of not only fascism but every ideology ever including all of religion not equaling said numbers. So why is fascism considered worse then Marxism which was literally the original argument?

I wasn't arguing that part I was making a comment on the de mastrie quote at the bottom of the poster. Clearly we've been talking about two different things.

 

[A'lan mandragon]

I wasn't arguing that part I was making a comment on the de mastrie quote at the bottom of the poster. Clearly we've been talking about two different things.

Apparently so

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

Apparently so

Sorry I was aggressive with my tone.

 

[Typhonis]

Basically how when Liberalism and Communism beat Fascism they destroyed the part of Fascism that allowed Liberalism to function. It also allowed the two to combine to become Managerialism. Where managers run the show.

 

[colorles]

morality itself, only make evolutionary sense if it is something that helps individuals of relatively equal rank or stature get along with each other in a pack or society. in other words, morality is just something people uphold as a way of protecting themselves. but it only exists between equals. this video puts it better:



There is a good comment in the comment section of that video, as bolded below:

Funny Hitchens mentions this. One passage in the bible where Jesus says "The meek shall ingerit the earth" is actually harkening back to the post-classical Greek era. In the original Greek translation of the bible, the word for meek is Praus which is a Greek word to describe a violent horse that has been calmed/tamed. It basically meant "those with strength and self control" I see this as Jesus and Christianity further emphasizing that synthesis of the violent past with a more moderate and peaceful present.

basically, the ideal human being is a powerful animal but with greater intelligence and self control/restraint. like the saying "speak softly and carry a big stick", the "speak softly" part is only possible because of the big stick backing it up...but the big stick would be a raging bull completely out of control if not for the "soft speaking" self control and restraint.

evolutionary speaking, the big stick part matters more to most animals. but with more intelligent animals like humans, even the men with the biggest sticks, could and would be killed if too many other men hated him for being such a violent psychopath. thus, the ideal human is a powerful man...who is also a man of self control and restraint