ContraPoints / William Nicholas Parrott / Natalie Wynn Parrott / Nykytyne2 - GamerGhazi Cannibalism Victim, Youtube "Intellectual"

I come here to talk about this thespian eunuch's meshugaas. Here's a fresh statement that seems very interesting (IMHO.)
96djhombmr361.jpg

It really makes me question things.

Is it possible to objectively determine that Contra is trash?
Can trash ever be majestic?
What separates mere trash from majestic trash?
Why does Contra look fab when talking about trash?
Is Contra's self-anointed trash-hood as a transwoman yet another example of misogyny and/or transphobia?

Many questions. Would welcome your answers.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Winner
Reactions: Narc and LurkTrawl
Is it possible to objectively determine that Contra is trash?
Can trash ever be majestic?
What separates mere trash from majestic trash?
Why does Contra look fab when talking about trash?
Is Contra's self-anointed trash-hood as a transwoman yet another example of misogyny and/or transphobia?

Many questions. Would welcome your answers.

Yes
No
Nothing
If you define "fabulous" as "mental patient got into the dressing room for a play" then it explains itself
Nope, just insanity

Hope this was elucidating.
 
That's actually Herbert Marcuse's "Repressive Tolerance", which says that everyone should apply selective tolerance so that left totalitarianism should be tolerated, but nothing right-wing should be tolerated (he got the idea from literal brownshirts). The paradox of tolerance doesn't apply to people who disagree, it only applies to literal Islamists/Antifa/etc who will just straight up kill anyone who tries to talk to them, about them, etc.
I've only ever heard the paradox of tolerance being an argument for why you shouldn't be allowed to spread Islamist propaganda, which is indeed mere advocacy.
Are you saying the paradox of tolerance is actually an argument for why violent terrorism should be a crime?
 
I've only ever heard the paradox of tolerance being an argument for why you shouldn't be allowed to spread Islamist propaganda, which is indeed mere advocacy.
Are you saying the paradox of tolerance is actually an argument for why violent terrorism should be a crime?
Personally I remember seeing people present it through this:
20979711_10159195056545298_350774567_n.jpg

And use the above to justify:
- Violent removal of the POTUS (NOTE for FBI: Which I do not agree with)
- Murder of police officers (NOTE for FBI: Which I do not agree with)
- Communist revolution (NOTE for FBI: Which I do not agree with)
- Unspecified attacks and/or repressions towards percieved fascists (NOTE for FBI: Which I do not agree with)
- Left-wing totalitarianism
 
Last edited:
Personally I remember seeing people present it through this:
View attachment 1789850
And use the above to justify:
- Violent removal of the POTUS (NOTE for FBI: Which I do not agree with)
- Murder of police officers (NOTE for FBI: Which I do not agree with)
- Communist revolution (NOTE for FBI: Which I do not agree with)
- Unspecified attacks and/or repressions towards percieved fascists (NOTE for FBI: Which I do not agree with)
- Communist or other left-wing totalitarianism
That's because communists are retards. From the original book:
In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.
I don't 100% agree with it, but it a better description of "we should declare Antifa a terrorist organization", than even "we should suppress Richard Spencer" (who is a literal white nationalist who does discuss his views and does not use violence).

Edit: I took a loser look at the cartoon, and the Nazi didn't fall outside Popper's limits. He is discussing his ideas and not telling his followers to assault those with different viewpoints. I think Popper's idea is good for stuff like the French stripping Islamists of citizenship and leaving them stateless. Australia has already been doing this for any traitor who goes on an overseas jihad, so they can't come home and keep going on with their bullshit. They can die in the shithole caliphate they signed up for.
 
Last edited:
That's because communists are retards. From the original book:

I don't 100% agree with it, but it a better description of "we should declare Antifa a terrorist organization", than even "we should suppress Richard Spencer" (who is a literal white nationalist who does discuss his views and does not use violence).

Edit: I took a loser look at the cartoon, and the Nazi didn't fall outside Popper's limits. He is discussing his ideas and not telling his followers to assault those with different viewpoints. I think Popper's idea is good for stuff like the French stripping Islamists of citizenship and leaving them stateless. Australia has already been doing this for any traitor who goes on an overseas jihad, so they can't come home and keep going on with their bullshit. They can die in the shithole caliphate they signed up for.
The specific argument he makes is that if they can't be won over by what he deems reasonable argument, they ought to be suppressed. This is. crucially, not the same as saying that they should never be suppressed.

If his opinion was that you should be able to argue in favor of extremist views, but not commit acts of terrorism, there is no support for it in that quote.
 
The "Paradox of Tolerance" is a way for liberals (in the classical sense) to have their cake and eat it too when it comes to political repression. First it's agreed that you can only censor Nazis and Communists. Then they expand the definition of Nazi and Communist to fit whoever they want to censor. Why do you think the go-to political insults of the '50s and '60s were "pinko" and "fascist"? The current state of political discourse in the USA (where anyone who wants Medicare For All is accused of supporting the Khmer Rouge, and anyone who wants less immigration is accused of being a White Nationalist) is the end result of applying Karl Popper's ideas.

EnugycVUUAEdVe4.jpg


EnugycUVkAEV-Yf.jpg


EnugyckUcAAnJTn.jpg
 
The "Paradox of Tolerance" is a way for liberals (in the classical sense) to have their cake and eat it too when it comes to political repression. First it's agreed that you can only censor Nazis and Communists. Then they expand the definition of Nazi and Communist to fit whoever they want to censor. Why do you think the go-to political insults of the '50s and '60s were "pinko" and "fascist"? The current state of political discourse in the USA (where anyone who wants Medicare For All is accused of supporting the Khmer Rouge, and anyone who wants less immigration is accused of being a White Nationalist) is the end result of applying Karl Popper's ideas.
Yeah, that's also one of the biggest problem I have with the Paradox of Tolerance. It's not that Hoppers is even wrong. In his books he talked about different kinds of societies and for example the difference between an authortarian (North Korea), open society (not one) and consensus society (Western societies). I think it's quite obvious that we aren't living in a free society, but in a society where a small amount of people create consensus that is then believed by everyone and can't be questioned. So I do think that Hopper's probably must have seen some problems with his idea of the Paradox of Tolerance.

What you describe about Nazis and Communists is the problem of Tolerance itself: "What the fuck is even tolerance?". Hopper of course talked mostly aobut Communists and Nazis in the context of intolerance, but he never really thought about the problem that the definition of tolerance can change dramatically. Nazis and Communists are easy targets, because they're quite open that they just want to mow down anyone who opposes them if you ask them the right questions. But what about people like J.K. Rowling? There are now people that (LITERALLY!) think that J.K. Rowling is inciting violence against troons. Or what about the slogan "Hate Speech is Violence!". While we somehow might find a way to define violence, how the fuck do you define hate speech? For some people this means denying the Holocaust and calling for the killing of the Jews (fair enough), for others it just means disagreeing with a ugly fat black troon on twitter.
 
Philosophasters, go away! I'm in a middle of a very serious conversation here.
Yes
No
Nothing
If you define "fabulous" as "mental patient got into the dressing room for a play" then it explains itself
Nope, just insanity

Hope this was elucidating.
Very elucidating.

Trash and madness have queer affinities. Consider plastic surgery, a waste of time and resources made for narcissists with some delusion of grandeur. Like, insanity. I am often caught thinking about global warming, trash and that urge of recycling my wastes to secure a future for my hypothetical children. It dawns on me that this principle could be extrapolated to transsexuals (such as Contrapoints) and maniacs in general. For scientific research. Organ harvesting. Plus the liquidation of noxious influences on all social media platforms. Many utilities, few setbacks. By appropriating madness and trash we could reallocate billions each year to help people with serious infirmities, in addition to allowing people to develop themselves and not rely on manic garbage as role-models. There's lots of hidden potential here. I wouldn't like it to end on a heap of garbage.

But what do you think?
 
Are we at a point where we can consider Contra's surgery botched? As people have pointed out her face is even more strange. She was visibly still "recovering" in her latest video, which seems to be quite a long time for ffs to heal. If so, I hope Nyk finds having a paralyzed fuckdoll face worth it. Hell, maybe it'll discourage her from getting the snippity, now that she's actually dealt with surgery.

ps. possible botox or filler maybe idk
 

And now "she" is a oppressed minority lol. It's quite ironic given the fact that Ryan would probably be one of the persons who bullied me for being an effiminate fag. If I had trooned out, most people wouldn't have been surprised, because I always shaved (still did) , never did any sport, was very thin (still are) and often wore unisex clothing and had very long hair for a long time . But I didn't because I know that a man never becomes a woman, period. Now we have guys like Ryan who fucked some girls in his teens, bullied gay people and claims now that he is a oppressed troon woman.

This world is truly fucked.
 
Are we at a point where we can consider Contra's surgery botched? As people have pointed out her face is even more strange. She was visibly still "recovering" in her latest video, which seems to be quite a long time for ffs to heal. If so, I hope Nyk finds having a paralyzed fuckdoll face worth it. Hell, maybe it'll discourage her from getting the snippity, now that she's actually dealt with surgery.

ps. possible botox or filler maybe idk
still does not look like a woman, must hurt paying all that money to just have a deformed face
 
still does not look like a woman, must hurt paying all that money to just have a deformed face
And we are talking about the present, I can't even imagine how that face is gonna look when he gets older, not only the face, the body.

Are we at a point where we can consider Contra's surgery botched? As people have pointed out her face is even more strange. She was visibly still "recovering" in her latest video, which seems to be quite a long time for ffs to heal. If so, I hope Nyk finds having a paralyzed fuckdoll face worth it. Hell, maybe it'll discourage her from getting the snippity, now that she's actually dealt with surgery.

ps. possible botox or filler maybe idk
Wtf man, it looks as if his face was something out of a Cyberpunk 2077 bug, I hear some weird voice alongside lips moving in an outlandish way, but they don't match at all, it's like uncanny valley ventriloquism.

Not to mention that it is going pretty downhill for Nyk, he went from pseudo-intellectualism, citing a bunch of big brain books and studies that didn't have anything to do with the subject of the video, to a weird gossip channel talking about internet "tea spilling". If I was one of those patrons that believe his videos to be the epitome of video production and smart writing, I'd want my money back.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Are we at a point where we can consider Contra's surgery botched? As people have pointed out her face is even more strange. She was visibly still "recovering" in her latest video, which seems to be quite a long time for ffs to heal. If so, I hope Nyk finds having a paralyzed fuckdoll face worth it. Hell, maybe it'll discourage her from getting the snippity, now that she's actually dealt with surgery.

ps. possible botox or filler maybe idk
Nyk's face here reminds me of another infamous "girl with a dick":
sleepawaycamp-4_758_426_81_s_c1.jpg
 
Back