It is normal to hate normalcy (16)

1 Name: Anonymage : 2015-10-09 10:18 [Del]

It is beyond me why grown, mature people cannot see why they hate normalcy--why they use memes such as "normie," "normalfag," and so on.

If you lived in conformist China, you would cherish sameness and any opposition you would hate and oppose. As a part of the Democratic Process - the process of creating a world-wide democracy - you have been made to hate what is too normal--but don't you see, THIS is normal itself?
In other words, you hate yourself for YOU are normal.

2 Name: Anonymage : 2015-10-09 11:10 [Del]

I agree to an extent. There are varying degrees of separation from mainstream society.

The lowest end would be highly publicized "countercultures", teenage fads, and products created by artists who "sold out". These aren't the least bit abnormal and aren't subject to ridicule.

Next would come groups people "don't get" but aren't subject to ridicule ether, many creative types fall into this category.

After that would be controversial groups that are generally subject to ridicule, but have a large enough population for people within the group to communicate with one another through the internet or conventions.

Lastly are people who are so different they have nobody who they can relate to, they are truly pariahs and act independently of other people. These people are very rare as this goes against human nature.

I would say Wizardchan is fairly far away from mainstream, but isn't unique and falls into the third category I mentioned. Of course this is an oversimplification (much like the OP, no offense), but is just the way I think of the subject.

Also, long time no see Democratic Process guy. In a strange way, I kind of miss your posts.

3 Name: Anonymage : 2015-10-09 11:24 [Del]

>>1
>>2
I didn't address the key point.

Yes, disliking others for being different wither they're closer or further away from the mainstream is completely normal. But I don't think people should strive to be abnormal, and there are varying degrees of normalcy.

4 Name: Anonymage : 2015-10-09 11:51 [Del]

I disagree. The democratic process is seen to embody diversity, but by it's nature it belies this assumption. The only way that democracies work is though sameness, if there is not a majority of people wanting something it does not happen. True it is about many disparate groups jockeying for power, and occasionally making concessions to each other, but it is still the normal leading the masses of normals. Further few groups believes they are abnormal. Nearly every group and mass considers themselves to be in the right, and thus what they base their idea of normalcy on. What is "normal" for a wizard is not normal for someone of the prevailing upper caste.

As a final aside, you mentioned the solidarity of "conformist china", however by all accounts most are not happy there with the conformity, but social rules and fear keep people in line. While having democracy would allow these masses to show themselves openly instead of lurking in the shadows, that does not mean that the democratic process facilitates the love of nonconformity. What facilitates nonconformity is human nature. Finally I wish to point out that conformity in Asian cultures is not just a Chinese thing, the democratic nations more or less have a general trend of conforming because they tend to be homogeneous in culture, upbringing, and ancestry, meaning that they match together on most of the larger issues, making nonconformity become a more micro phenomenon.

5 Name: Anonymage : 2015-10-09 12:45 [Del]

>>4

>the democratic process

Oh god. It's this fucking guy again.

6 Name: Anonymage : 2015-10-09 12:50 [Del]

>>5
Anon I was quoting OP.

7 Name: Anonymage : 2015-10-09 12:51 [Del]

>>6
Oh, right. I should probably read entire threads and not just the last post. Either way - fucking hell, not this guy again.

8 Name: Anonymage : 2015-10-10 00:14 [Del]

Counterculture is an overused term. Yes, people mindlessly at large try to renew themselves and their environment even when such is just superficial and completely unwarranted, as we see with "this meme is overused" and the attempt to make new mindless memes--but this mindless desire to renew things is a part of created culture itself and does certainly not come naturally for the majority.
But is the culture we have in the West simply the mindless byproduct of mindless teenagers and other cockroaches? Of course not.
Culture has a political purpose to play, this is why Islam is not a liked religion by the mindless masses and Islam is certainly no part of Western culture, although if culture was unintended and just random, Islam certainly would have a strong hold on Western culture.

One of the dangers to an open and free, democratic society is fundamentalism and dictatorships or leaders with absolutely control.
One way to counter the fundamentalism is exactly by propagating individualism to the mindless cockroaches.
This is why mothers tell their children, "If your friends jumped off a bridge, would you do it too?" or "Just be yourself," or "Do what you feel is right" (notice "feel" and not "believe").
A benefit of this individualism is also that it facilitates innovation and solves the problem of empires collapsing because they are unable to meet the challenges of the future--individualism encourages solving problems with new methods that work the best, as opposed to with the old methods that may not be applicable in the future.
As for dictatorships, people are encouraged to criticize politicians and accuse them of the world's ills and suspect of them that they are egotistical sociopaths who work only in their own interests and deceive others to get to their end, although this is surprisingly not actually true often of politicians.
This takes away politicians' excess powers and makes the possibility of a dictatorship emerging from a democracy, like with Nazi Germany, very unlikely.
This also gives the people more power, as the people at large are stupid cockroaches with no understanding of anything, and furthers true democracy - the rule of the [majority of] people.

Much of culture is of course just symbolic to further democratic values and ideas.
Take for example "Illuminati" or the "New World Order," and the talk about in the future the NWO can chip us and control us and bla bla bla.
Can any of you figure out what these things symbolize?
They symbolize a world ruled by a secret, corrupt dictatorship.
Do you then see, these 3 things are the very antithesis of democratic values: secrecy because it rules out the masses' involvement in politics; corruption because it literally means that the leaders do not work in the people's interest; and dictatorship because the leaders dictate the people and the people have no say in things.
All by design.
Then we have the cockroaches who say, "We don't ACTUALLY live in a free world, it's all a lie to control us." The purpose of this stupid belief, ironic as it is, is to further democratic values--isn't it obvious?
All these "conspiracy theorists" are furthering democratic values, they just don't know!
This is ironically similar to the "conspiracy" leaders such as Alex Jones, David Icke, Alan Watt (cuttingthroughthematrix), Occupy movement's top leaders, etc., etc. They're all furthering democratic values and are working in favor of democracy, even if they are deliberately spreading lies to make money or are this or that!

9 Name: Anonymage : 2015-10-10 14:34 [Del]

>>8
But that is not exactly how it is though. People say "Just be yourself", but they don't really mean it, do they? They want you to just conform to the social group, or the body politic. In a sense, the entire would is a contradiction. We are not free, because certain behaviors and lifestyles are seen as unacceptable, but then we turn right around and say we are an in an individualistic society. We say we don't judge people be the color of their skin, but we say that whites inherently have more "privilege" than other races. A true individualistic society would be heaven for a wizard, but as it is, people are just using the guise of being "progressive" and "understanding" to shame people and behaviors they do not like.

10 Name: Anonymage : 2015-10-10 16:05 [Del]

>>9
People say whites have more privileges because this is a society that was created by and for whites. Its only natural for whites to have a natural advantage in their self created environment, and I don't see how this is a bad thing inherently. Besides, white privilege has never done anything for me.

11 Name: Anonymage : 2015-10-10 16:11 [Del]

>>8
You addressed a lot of different topics in that post. But I'll address the "conterculture" bit.

Common countercultures (level 1) do not occur organically, that much is obvious. They aren't far away from the norm at all, but the higher levels are. That's why society condemns, ignores, or criminalizes them. Of course there is a bit of wiggle room, depending on the society. Once you step out of that is when you get in trouble.

People are greased to stay within the fixed bounds that the group (society) sets, regardless of how tight those bounds are. It's not just human nature, but the nature of most primates to my knowledge.

12 Name: Anonymage : 2015-10-11 03:11 [Del]

>>9
It makes sense to believe that this is just symbolic parts of the Democratic Process, for if not then why is there no culture created that shames those who reject people based on their "ugliness"? Why is there no "right to be ugly," and no "uglyphobe" slogans thrown around?
Many men commit suicide because their lives are ruined based upon something so objectively valueless as physical appearance.

Isn't it ironic that the social justice warrior cancer women who triumph anti-racist and anti-antiLGBT, anti-sexist speeches online are the same ones who would reject a man based on his physical appearance! And if you were to tell these ugly, semen-ridden cumdumpsters that they're wrong, they'd say something like, "You're ugly! Ewww! Get away from me, creep!".
What about the right to be an "ugly creep"?
Why do women have the borderless "right" to shame those unfortunate enough to have been born ugly?

It wasn't G-d's intention that women should pick their male partner or that men should ask for permission to be with women but that men should pick their female partner in spite her "personal desires".
Culture is contradictory and hypocritical. The only sense I can make of this when democracy is true inspite its lack of full implementation, is that various people's "rights" (Black rights, women's rights, etc.) is symbolic propaganda for the mindless feminine-minded cockroaches as a way to unite society.
ALL people have certain unalienable rights in virtue of having been created by a perfect being whom we call G-d. This means that even the "homophobes" have a right to exist and practice their "homophobic" ideals.
But to unite society, the ostracized members have to be symbolically brought into society again and the members who ostracize them are themselves to be ostracized. Though, as I've mentioned, this never happens to women. Women can destroy men's lives as much as they please.

13 Post deleted by moderator.

14 Name: Anonymage : 2019-11-09 19:20 [Del]

I mainly see "normie" thrown at out-groups and teasing clients that fail initiation into the in-group. I reckon that commie countries only reverse the title because they value order, but it's the same idea. I don't think anti-normies and anti-weirdos necessarily oppose one another.

Did the social group choose liberty (kill all normies), order (kill all weirdos), or autocracy (kill all the lazybones)? This is a question: who is your god? My self, my nation, or my state?

There is but one god what doesn't have an out group.

15 Post deleted by moderator.

16 Post deleted by moderator.

This thread has been closed. You cannot post in this thread any longer.