Some years ago I was on a plane coming back from visting a relative who lived abroad. At the time I was a very heavy smoker and was dying for a cigarette after a 5 hour flight but knew there was no chance of having one for at least another hour while I went through customs and waited for my luggage.
Cue some bloke who just lights up a cigarette whilst walking through the terminal as we come off the plane. He was a big bald bastard with a mean face and wearing a football shirt or something similar and he simply didn't give a shit that he was breaking the law.
Of course I flirted with the idea of following suit, but I didn't dare. I knew the moment I took my first puff some sort of official/staff member would come out of the toilets and issue me with an on-the-spot fine. Or my fellow passengers would suddenly decide to complain instead of just ignoring the smoke.
I didn't even know his name but I hated that man. I have lain awake every night for the past six years thinking about how much I still hate him. He was breaking the rules and getting away with it. He was doing what I wanted to do but could not because of the fact that I care what other people think and he doesn't. And that made me hate the silent majority of people who did and said nothing, including and primarily myself. Because I was jealous.
We all know the sort of person. The kid who experimented more heavily with drugs as a teenager than the rest of your friends but still went on to be healthy and successful in adulthood. People who shaft business partners and yet are still always somehow able to find someone new to invest in their latest scheme. People who cheat on loving and loyal partners and then get another chance when caught out. Etc etc etc.
Fuck those people but a thousand times more fuck the people who allow those people to continue by allowing themselves to be charmed or won round or even intimidated. Letting someone get away with being a cunt is a negative act, it harms society.
Get some self confidence about yourself, that is the missing link between you and them. They know they're going to do just fine and that whatever trouble they have is just a bump on the road, you on the other hand want to bleat like you're a victim.
>>22554 Self esteem issues screamed out of this post as well. Parts of it are exaggerated for comedic value but it indicates something wrong is going on with OP.
Are you okay lad? We need some more context about your life situation.
I agree with you OP. People who ignore rules and regulations are just expressing a form of narcissism - no different than those animals that litter.
The worst part is they are making the world worse for everyone around them all the while playing out petty excuses to justify what they know is wrong. Just look at this bellend >>22551 ignoring that certain asthmatics will be very much inconvenienced by his actions.
The problem is we as a culture still have this hangup that snitching is wrong which is exacerbated by people who abuse the function just because they can. I don't know if this will ever change unless we start rewarding people for reporting rule breaking but until then many people will be reluctant to say anything due to the social cost.
This shit happened all the time to me in fucking primary school, the bullying cunts get a slap on the wrist for the same things you'd get your parents called up for. They often ended up being favourites of the female teachers, hmm.
Adult life really isn't terribly different, people have zero awareness of the double standards and hypocrisy that permeates social life or their own disregard for logic. When dealing with people it can be less stressful if you just mentally think of them as children, your expectations will be lower and it's overall much less stressful.
All of the professional /emo/-grade psychologists are busy right now but I'm an amateur backup psychologist sent from /iq/. As far as I can tell op is well pissed off with this lad wot wos a proper cunt in school and always banged this bird wot op liked even though he cheated on her and got away with it, all while op hung around in the background and waited for someone to notice how special he was and light his metaphorical cigarette for him.
You pair of proper numpties need to grow up. Life isn't fair, the bad guy often wins, fortune favours the brave, god helps he who helps himself, and whinging about it online just makes you look like the teenage spastics you probably are. Not to mention we say grassing in this country, not snitching. Fucking yank fucks.
It's an interesting dynamic. I've been on both sides of this coin. When I was younger, I was timid, unsure of myself, and naive to boot. This translated into me being called on absolutely anything I did or said, and perceived as being shit at my job, even though, looking back, I was actually pretty good.
As I've grown older, wiser, and gained confidence, I've found that I can make the same comments, perform the same actions as before, and now, instead of treating me with contempt, people think I'm hilarious. I can make monumental fuckups and laugh them off, and people will find a way to blame someone else.
Deep down, I'm still a cynical introvert, and it just makes me hate people even more, now that I can see how easily we're manipulated by a bit of personality or authority. People I work with, who used to tell me my job "wasn't for me", will now tell me that other people are shit and they wished those people could work more like I do. It's not like I suddenly became amazing at the job, I know for sure I'm basically the same skill level I've always been, people just perceive me differently now. It's fucking stupid. Everyone is a fucking idiot. I don't even think they remember how poorly they used to treat me. I'm still in the transitional phase where I still need some level of external praise, so I haven't told these hyptocrites to fuck off yet, which just serves to remind me I'm as stupid as everyone else.
I feel like this could turn into my manifesto so I should stop, but fuck it makes me angry.
TL;DR do whatever the fuck you want, and if you do it with enough authority people will love you for it.
>>22561 I think we're all fully aware that life isn't fair ladm8, this isn't some revelation you're just endowed us with.
The problem with the "life isn't fair" cop out is that it basically destroys the whole premise of society, that the hardworking and good are rewarded and the evil punished, this is the keystone of civilization. Decency, Morality.
In a low trust society where the law of the jungle rules you have a shit fucking culture like in Brazil or Africa. Religion and morality were brought about to make people serve the collective, and not just themselves, for mutual benefit, that's really what civilization is.
To steal some SJW parlance you are "victim-blaming".
> the whole premise of society, that the hardworking and good are rewarded and the evil punished, this is the keystone of civilization. Decency, Morality.
I don't have a degree in politics or anthropology, but I have to say that that sounds less like society or civilization (I can't think of a single form of modern governance that bases itself on the idea of "good" people succeeding over "evil") and more like some bland ill thought out form of primitive Christian morality.
>>22571 There is nothing inherently Christian about morality, you don't need a degree to realise that m8.
Every religion and every society punishes those who do bad and praises those who do good. "Good" and "Bad" as we know the concepts only make sense within the context of the collective and what is injurious or beneficial for it.
>>22571 Oh right, so all the people we imprison each year aren't considered "bad" by society? How about the criminals executed each year in countries that still use capital punishment?
As for "good" people, the crux of western capitalism is the idea that if you work hard and better yourself and your contribution to society, you will be rewarded for it. Whether this agrees with your moral idea of "good", or whether you think capitalism works as it should is irrelevant to this. It is the idea our society is built on.
> Oh right, so all the people we imprison each year aren't considered "bad" by society? How about the criminals executed each year in countries that still use capital punishment?
No. In any secular society the judicial system is based upon caused harm, not any moralistic concept of "good" or "bad". Even crimes that people assume are moral such as personal drug use are actually criminalised based on perceived harm to society. It's not a moral judgment call.
> As for "good" people, the crux of western capitalism is the idea that if you work hard and better yourself and your contribution to society, you will be rewarded for it.
I think the pair of you might be managing to mix up "doing good" and "doing well". A person can be "bad" and yet still "do well" within a modern society.
>>22578 Yes, here in the west we are still very much influenced by Christianity, even if we are effectively atheist. The pathological altruism so endemic in modern western nations could only have been borne of Christianity.
Nonetheless, the same basic laws and rules underpinning the three monotheistic religions (namely, the ten commandments) can be found in other religions and societies all around the world. Individualist behavior which hurts others may be good for the individual but bad for society, and therefore deemed bad.
> Nonetheless, the same basic laws and rules underpinning the three monotheistic religions (namely, the ten commandments) can be found in other religions and societies all around the world. Individualist behavior which hurts others may be good for the individual but bad for society, and therefore deemed bad.
Absolutely correct. However, if society effectively penalized this "bad" behaviour then such people wouldn't get ahead and OP wouldn't have had anything to complain about.
Religious morality has (at least in most major religions) always been about keeping the masses humble and downtrodden while the upper caste(s) run roughshod over them.
It's this same Christian morality, carried through to a secular society, that causes some people to wring their hands and bemoan how unfair it all is that some people are "cunts" and get away with it, without ever actually getting the punchline (that it's their own faux-morality that both allows the cunt to be a cunt and also stops them from being a cunt too). Nietzsche was a cunt but he had the right idea about this.
>>22571 >I don't have a degree in politics or anthropology
Just read up about the cultures in Greece and Southern Italy. Christianity had a good deal to do with it actually but its also true that societies go through high and low periods with the lows being ones where typically everyone gets in it either for themselves or more likely their families.
When everyone gets in it for themselves and flaunts central authority you quickly see that these places are not good for living in.
>>22578 >In any secular society the judicial system is based upon caused harm
The basis of Western Law is in consent. What you are describing is a legal system for a totalitarian state.
Furthermore while the Contract Law pretends to be amoral you will see that morality is very much the basis for judgements within Criminal Law and more generally the idea of Natural Law has been a common theme across history. After all a fundamental tenant of almost all offences is a guilty (and therefore immoral) mind.
To look at this another way see the use of moral language in the famous judgement of R v Brown which ruled against consenting to BDSM.
>>22580 >Religious morality has (at least in most major religions) always been about keeping the masses humble and downtrodden while the upper caste(s) run roughshod over them.
Absolute bollocks. The very ideal of the New Testament that every man is your brother is the antithesis to feudal aristocracy and the basis of the British labour movement from its Quaker roots.
>Nietzsche was a cunt but he had the right idea about this.
Nietzsche was an antisocial cunt crying that he couldn't get a girlfriend. People obeying rules for the common good is the only way a society can work and the reason the lower classes live in such shit environments compared to the order of a Middle Class neighbourhood.
>>22584 Isn't there a bit in Ephesians that says slaves should shut up and do whatever their master demands of them? And of course, Jesus himself said the same thing about when a brutal imperialist power bent on world domination conquers you, just roll over, accept that makes might right and render your taxes unto The Emperor like a good little boy.
Then of course you have this statement issued by the Synod of Gangra (ratified by the Council of Chalcedon a century later and regarded as official Catholic doctrine until the 19th century):
"If anyone, on the pretext of religion, teaches another man's slave to despise his master and to withdraw from his service, and not serve his master with good will and all respect, let him be anathema."
I'm not saying Christianity doesn't have its good points but the New Testament is hardly the place to find them. Of course the Old Testament is even worse which is why we always pretend it doesn't exist.
Personally, if I was looking for a code of ethics to live by I wouldn't look to the bastardization of a bronze-age cult dedicated to the slavish worship and eternal fear of the ancient Canaanite god of war. Especially not to the most bloodthirsty and unrepentantly evil of its three major branches, one that was specifically tailored to attract converts from the people of Rome, a serious candidate for the most evil society, organisation or person ever to have been produced by humans. An impressive feat for a species already heavily predisposed to enjoy rape, slavery and war.
I stopped right here. What something says in an epistle is not Christian teaching - Christian teaching is established by the respective church's doctrine. Even if Paul wrote down, in the same book, 'doggy style is the best position', that doesn't enshrine it as Christian doctrine. You are making the classic /r/atheism mistake of pretending that you understand Christianity from your cherry picked extracts of tens and tens of individual books.
There's a reason it's called Christianity, not 'Biblism'.
>>22586 While I'm aware that Christianity doesn't put as much stock in the bible as, say Islam does with the Quran, it's still a book with a unique position of prominence within the religion. I also gave various other non-Ephesians examples in my post such as a direct quote from a man generally equated with God himself (though admittedly the book itself never describes Jesus as such).
Regardless, if I was laying down a code of ethics I wanted people to follow I wouldn't just pick half-decent books that had already been written by other people, throw them all together without really reading them, and tell people to ignore the bad bits. I would write my own book.
>>22585 >Especially not to the most bloodthirsty and unrepentantly evil of its three major branches
Stopped reading there.
Actually, I was stupid and read a bit more, Rome was no different to any other civilization, it was just the biggest and best of it's day. That you don't realize that evinces your naive understanding of the world.
>>22590 This is incorrect. You might as well say North Korea was no different to any other communist country during the cold war, it just so happened to outlive the others. Everything has its causes, sadly bloodthirsty psychopathic regimes tend to be better at surviving and therefore able to propogate their monstrous ideas.
I'm not going to pretend the world was a cuddly, friendly place around the time of the Prinicipate but there is certainly an argument to be made that Rome was the worst of a bad bunch and can only find its peers at the bottom of the ethics barrel if you extend the timeline to include the Assyrians, the Mongols and the Aztecs. Rome was openly evil for the sake of being evil like Dick Cheney or a cartoon villain, that is a rare trait for an entire society to casually share and revel in even on our bloodthirsty planet.
Oh and Christianity is by far the worst of the Abrahmaic faiths, partly because it had to be moulded to such an openly evil host society and designed to appeal to its sensibilities. Even disregarding the toxic legacy of Rome any idea which combines the megalomania of Islam (another, less direct and therefore less violent, echo of Rome) with the intolerance of Judaism is going to be a living nightmare.
> Absolute bollocks. The very ideal of the New Testament that every man is your brother is the antithesis to feudal aristocracy and the basis of the British labour movement from its Quaker roots.
You've managed to miss the punchline again, somehow. It's the very "love thy neighbour as you love thyself" and "turn the other cheek" mentality of Christian faux-morality that allows people to be kept humble and walked all over.
Look, if you want to argue about being a special Christian snowflake who has a deep and gnostic understanding of the will of Jesus Christ you can go and have it with a brick wall; what I'm talking about is the base morality of contemporary society, which in turn is derived from primitive Christian values.
>>22592 I really dislike these sanctimonious judgements about ancient civilizations from a place of comfort and plenty. Slavery was just the status quo, it still IS the status quo in much of the world, and I'm not talking about Foxconn, I mean actual fucking slaves.
Funnily enough, the apparent sensitivity which you feel about this - or at least think you SHOULD feel - comes from Christianity. Humans don't naturally have this kind of empathy for people outside their immediate group, it has to be taught, indoctrinated at an early age. Those who disregard this brainwashing end up as cunts like the OP gripes about.
The type of moral sensitivity you display would make no sense, or be an anomaly at best, coming from a culture that hadn't inculcated Christian morality.
>>22594 >I really dislike these sanctimonious judgements about ancient civilizations from a place of comfort and plenty.
Anyone who was awake during their GCSEs knows about the dangers of presentism. I'm not judging the Romans based on my modern ideas about morality, I'm judging them based on contemporary ideas held by comparable civilisations. They aren't bad for doing things I think are wrong in 2016, they are bad because they did things they already knew/believed to be wrong 2000 years ago and didn't give a shit so long as it served their interests and they stood a reasonable chance of getting away with it. If you have a shorter, more accurate, definiton of evil I'd love to hear it.
>Slavery was just the status quo, it still IS the status quo in much of the world, and I'm not talking about Foxconn, I mean actual fucking slaves.
True. Just looking around my room I can see at least 3 groups of things that I know for certain are the results of slave-labour (the clothes I'm wearing, the electronic devices I'm communicating to you with and the coke I'm snorting). I also know the paint on the walls, the curtains over the window, and even the curry I ate earlier, have all had someone crucial in the supply chain getting fucked over at some point but not daring to argue on account of needing more work from whoever they worked for. Slavery does not "get off easy" because it is a human constant any more than genocide or rape would. All of my patrilineal ancestors (aside from my father) I either know or suspect to have enjoyed beating their wives, that does not make such behaviour acceptable.
>Funnily enough, the apparent sensitivity which you feel about this - or at least think you SHOULD feel - comes from Christianity.
No it doesn't. It comes from fear. I don't want to be raped, murdered, conquered or tortured so I don't rape, murder, conquer or torture. This is a lesson any civilisation learns in infancy or it is destroyed by neighbours slightly more adept than itself in feigning niceness.
>Funnily enough, the apparent sensitivity which you feel about this - or at least think you SHOULD feel - comes from Christianity. Humans don't naturally have this kind of empathy for people outside their immediate group, it has to be taught, indoctrinated at an early age. Those who disregard this brainwashing end up as cunts like the OP gripes about.
I sort of agree, but I would add that any individual who never learns to take the feelings of their peers into account is very, very lucky to live past their teens. Any person as reprehensible as you are describing, and who genuinely never exhibits any glimmer of ability to learn the rules, is ostracised by whatever society spawned them and ostracism has meant death until frighteningly recently. This is not the result of an innate and divinely ordained goodness nor is it a product of primitive Christian values in a godless universe, it is the result of self-interest. Nobody wants to live next door to a guy who killed their last neighbour and humans who can't live with other humans tend to die out within a single generation.
>The type of moral sensitivity you display would make no sense, or be an anomaly at best, coming from a culture that hadn't inculcated Christian morality.
Nonsense. My beliefs coincide with Christianity to a certain extent, but only in the areas that Christianity got it right. My beliefs coincide with Nazi Germany in relation to smoking in government buildings and vivisection but that doesn't make me a Nazi nor does it mean my ideas would make no sense without Nazism.
>>22595 >If you have a shorter, more accurate, definiton of evil I'd love to hear it
Evil is a relative concept, to believe it is some absolute "thing" makes you sound as though you were yourself religious, or believed in a god who judges our actions. This is the problem really, morality makes very little sense when divorced from the concept of a god, it all becomes about the whip, and not the carrot, and a shallow and effete "niceness".
>I sort of agree, but I would add that any individual who never learns to take the feelings of their peers into account is very, very lucky to live past their teens
One can pretend to care about people's feelings well enough, those that excel at this (psychopaths) do extremely well in life, and often are incapable of any real emotion.
The idea that men who were violent, selfish and "evil" would be weeded out of the gene pool is very naive, the truth of the matter is that these are qualities in a man which women love to the core of their being, this is simple observable fact, and makes perfect sense from an evolutionary perspective. A nice, "good" man is unlikely to be the best at defending his tribe, fighting off competing mates and at impregnating many women. An aggressive cunt is.
This endeavour we call civilization is simply a restraining of the animal in both the sexes, of men to either channel their aggression, or bury it, and for women to have to endure a monogamous relationship with an inferior mate.
>My beliefs coincide with Christianity to a certain extent, but only in the areas that Christianity got it right.
You are not an isolate, from as soon as you could understand a language you were programmed with a belief system. You do not get to pick and choose your beliefs in the way you think you can.
One can go so far as to say that free will is an illusion, and indeed many philosophers have come to this very conclusion.
>>22607 Ah, the armchair evolutionary biologist, how nice of you to show up. Tell us more about how our every action is hardwired in our brains because of how people lived thousands of years ago.
>>22610 When did .gs get into this culture of labelling everything 'trying to start a cunt-off'? It's really tedious. I was only taking the piss out of this lad for trying to show off.
Sage not ticked because apparently it DRIVES YOU CRAZY
This site would be boring without "cunt offs", we all understand that deep down. It's been ~8 years of Britain's Got Cunts, and we're all budding contestants. I'm winning, just so you know
I do sometimes feel like there are one too many lads here who can't handle the BANTZ. This is an anonymous image board after all, and it's still remarkably civilised considering.
The word tedious is becoming somewhat ubiquitous of late also.
>>22550 I had the same feelings as you a couple of months ago. I don't know what changed... Actually, I do know what changed. I simply became a huge cunt.
Life is too short, and you only get ahead if you do whatever you want, especially if you can get away with it.
>>22666 If we believe in the myth of fairness, collectively, we get a nice society, where you have friendly polite people, like in Japan, for instance.
If we live according to our true cuntish nature we end up with third world shitholes, which are unsafe and uncivilized.
Rulebreaking and uncouth cunts undermine the whole beautiful illusion, and if too many people act like cunts then it all falls apart.
Yeah man, people don't understand Japan! They're all really deep and have no problems whatsoever! If only third-world countries were more polite and had katanas.
