Why is moralfagging a bad thing?

[HyperboreanRightsActivist]

Is it really wrong to oppose TND, white genocide, capitalist exploitation of third world labor, and transgender bathtub-grooming under a moral pretense?

Is it a hypocritical thing? I don't support the holocaust, holodomor, hololive, holo-whatever genocide, does that absolve me from being labelled a moralfag?

Is it because moralfags are annoying? Is advocating for human decency really a bad thing? Are we becoming too arrogant? Should your mom tongue my anus? (The answer to that last one is yes, btw, and I expect to her be STD-free)

 

[The Backwards Man]

Is it really wrong to oppose TND

Yes

white genocide

No

capitalist exploitation

Yes

of third world labor

No

and transgender bathtub-grooming under a moral pretense?

No

 

[SuperShibuyaFighter]

Moralfagging is not usually used for most of those things and is used more about sexual, marital, and family values.

Calling out societal decay like troonism and violent atrocities isn't really moral fagging.

Heck moralfagging isn't simply just having more "moral" opinions on things but it usually referring to someone being an obnoxious faggot about their set of morals and pushing it on others, like when Josh moralfags his opinion on anime and how Japan is so much more degenerate despite the fact that the west literally has buttplug fags in dog masks walking around in the streets in front of children.

 

[Dyn]

Moralfagging is when you're being obnoxious and annoying in an on-topic thread and getting in the way of everyone who just wants to laugh at a retard falling over. It doesn't apply to your gay political opinions. You can have whatever gay political opinions you want.

 

[The Cunting Death]

Because you talk like a fag and your shits all retarded.

 

[Fastest Hand In The East]

I never understood why is it wrong to say that it is wrong to use violence. I see a video of people beating someone THEY CLAIM is a pedo and all I see is a mob of primates satisfying their low violent urges. It has nothing to do with the justice or retribution.
I first realized something was wrong with the world when I saw americans celelbrating killing of Bin Laden. They were celebrating murder. They weren't feeling bad that it came down to this, they didn't feel bad that the world was cabaple of creating Bin Ladens in rows. They were chimping out like a bunch of apes at Time Square, I remember those smiling, happy faces- trowing a party about a human being riddled with lead.

 

[skykiii]

Heck moralfagging isn't simply just having more "moral" opinions on things but it usually referring to someone being an obnoxious faggot about their set of morals and pushing it on others, like when Josh moralfags his opinion on anime and how Japan is so much more degenerate despite the fact that the west literally has buttplug fags in dog masks walking around in the streets in front of children.

This, exactly. Its less to do with what your saying and more how you're saying it, but made exponentially more annoying when your morals and ethics are based on hypocrisy or cognitive dissonance--IE if you have a "can't smell your own shit" problem.

There's a reason I myself believe that anything you yourself do, you immediately lose the right to criticize others for that same thing. Bad people universally fall into a "rules for thee but not for me" mindset.

 

[gorgoroth7134]

Two things can be true. But annoying, unnuanced, idyllic rhetoric in a debate space is fucking retarded and unnecessary. We all know what social mores we should be following, but that doesn't diminish any of the reasons we pray for TND.

 

[Safir]

There's a reason I myself believe that anything you yourself do, you immediately lose the right to criticize others for that same thing. Bad people universally fall into a "rules for thee but not for me" mindset.

This is retarded and Kant was a moron (or rather he became a moron when he turned to midlife crisis sperging from the science of his youth). For most actions/inactions that are considered specific crimes, society has carved out exceptions by adding on words. As the number of sentences that can be generated is countably infinite, you (any Kantian) can carve out any exception for him/herself. For example, you generally shouldn't stab people with knives... unless it's in self-defense or in defense of your family or your people (see?)... or if you're a doctor... unless the patient didn't give consent, then it's wrong again... unless the patient is disabled and the rep consented... etc. It's trivial to explain why "anything you do" is never the same thing as what others are doing.

As Kant (1724-1804) was two years old when Newton (1643-1727) died, he had no excuse. Neither do you.

 

[Stan]

Typically moralfagging upsets people only when they disagree with you. I’ve moralfagged for causes the Farms are sympathetic to and gotten upvotes, but if I moralfag an ideology kiwi farms community doesn’t like, I’m called out. Accusing others of moralfagging/virtue signaling is kind of an expression of envy and a demand to conform. Fat meat eaters would call vegan influencers moralfagging.

Also you guys barely understand the difference between good and evil and apply it so unevenly (e.g. comments about harming black people is all good fun, comments about harming actual monkeys is not) that I would caution you all against taking a strong moral stance on anything. It would contradict with your lol anon style nihilism.

 

[skykiii]

This is retarded and Kant was a moron (or rather he became a moron when he turned to midlife crisis sperging from the science of his youth).

I have nothing to say about Kant, since I've never read a word of him and thus don't know how he's at all relevant. You'll have to explain the connection to me.

That said....

For most actions/inactions that are considered specific crimes, society has carved out exceptions by adding on words. As the number of sentences that can be generated is countably infinite, you (any Kantian) can carve out any exception for him/herself. For example, you generally shouldn't stab people with knives... unless it's in self-defense or in defense of your family or your people (see?)... or if you're a doctor... unless the patient didn't give consent, then it's wrong again... unless the patient is disabled and the rep consented... etc. It's trivial to explain why "anything you do" is never the same thing as what others are doing.

TBH this is one reason I hate moralfagging. They're very often the ones that try to obfuscate shit and conflate things to the point it gets ridiculous.

Anyone who has better than a five-year-old's grasp of morality understands that no, not all situations are created equal. Not every situation that involves anything that could be called a "knife" is equivalent to a murderous stabbing. I agree with you that shit is retarded.

 

[Norbert the Tiger]

I never understood why is it wrong to say that it is wrong to use violence.

I believe that is a double negative, if wrong is interpreted as a negating qualifier. Your ideas about violence are incredibly naive. As Heinlein points out, violence is the SUPREME authority, from which all authority is derived. It is why the victors write the history books. It is the reason why American revolutionaries are not described as traitors and the Left is now rebranding Confederates as traitors.
If I am not mistaken, one the Navy Seal unit has as its motto "“Despite what your momma told you, Violence does solve problems.”

There's a reason I myself believe that anything you yourself do, you immediately lose the right to criticize others for that same thing.

That's silly. A relapsing heroin addict or alcoholic is probably in a better position than anyone to explain why it is wrong and you should not do it.
..............................................................................

Concerning moral-fagging, it is interesting people have different definitions. It is internet slang so I try not to use the term in other contexts. Whenever I think of a more formal expression, I think of the term "moral-trumpeting." (Nietzsche famously derided Schiller as a "moral trumpeter." Moral grandstanding or finger-wagging also works. In my mind, moral trumpeting or moral fagging is associated with a deep impracticality, or demonstrative finger-wagging that seems to overlook critical points or considerations.

Two examples that exemplify obnoxious moral-fagging come to mind. A Christian who is adamant that sex before marriage is wrong, but does not seem to discern hormones are real and people no longer marry at 18, 19, 20, thus expecting somebody to abstain well into his 20s or even 30s, which is not healthy (not that hyper promiscuous sex is either) and not practical. It is an unreasonable moral demand that makes no account of the facts on the ground.

Example two--people who take the United States drinking age of 21 seriously. College kids under 21 drink. Most high school kids drink, and those that don't are typically socially isolated. All our stupid drinking laws do is make a big deal out of it, which leads to things like binge drinking, which does not exist in Europe because minors can drink beer or wine no problem. The 21 law was on overreaction to MAAD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) and is only tangentially related to the problem of drunk driving.

I do think there is an element of hypocrisy or grand-standing with these things, because I doubt most who defend the drinking law really abstained from alcohol till they are 21, and if they were they were not the sort I would want to hang out with when I was young and i doubt I would want to hang out with you as an adult.

 

[Grundlejungle]

It's wrong because no one like a whiney wet blanket bitch ass nigga.

 

[skykiii]

That's silly. A relapsing heroin addict or alcoholic is probably in a better position than anyone to explain why it is wrong and you should not do it.

My admonition wasn't about people using themselves as cautionary tales. It was about people who (for just one example) call other people tyrants but then turn and suggest that we need martial law in order to stop tyranny. Or things of that nature--IE doing exactly the thing you claim the others are bad for doing, in cases where there's no reasonable case you can make that what you're doing is different or better.

 

[I (Don't) Have A Gun]

Also you guys barely understand the difference between good and evil and apply it so unevenly (e.g. comments about harming black people is all good fun, comments about harming actual monkeys is not) that I would caution you all against taking a strong moral stance on anything. It would contradict with your lol anon style nihilism.

So this is a good example of why no one likes a moralfag. Very preachy, very full of themselves. Maybe there's some value in what's being said, but since it starts of with a fair bit of condescension and painting every single kiwi with the same brush, and goes on to sound like they're placing themselves as some kind of moral authority it's hard to really care about what is said. It very easy to dismiss an opinion laced in dismissal after all.

 

[Anasa Tristis]

Moralfags are annoying. People don't like to be reproached and made self conscious of their moral failings by moralfags. It makes them uncomfortable. And discomfort (and true and honest self examination) is oppressive harm these days. Resilience against it has been bred out over multiple generations.

Big Devouring Mommy wants everyone to play nice. So no feelz get hurt. So no self esteem gets lowered. So everyone loves and obeys her. But ironically, high self esteem (and no corrections imposing humility) plays a big role in doing evil deeds.

We need more moralfagging. But in a postmodern/deconstructed environment, good luck defining good, evil, or moralfagging itself.

 

[Stan]

So this is a good example of why no one likes a moralfag. Very preachy, very full of themselves. Maybe there's some value in what's being said, but since it starts of with a fair bit of condescension and painting every single kiwi with the same brush, and goes on to sound like they're placing themselves as some kind of moral authority it's hard to really care about what is said. It very easy to dismiss an opinion laced in dismissal after all.

A certain measure of my condescension is earned. People trash talk me all the time here. It’s not a distortion of this community at all to say the vast majority of kiwi farmers are strongly racist. I’d have an easier time naming which of you aren’t racist. Don’t act like such a contrarian hivemind and it won’t be so easy for me.

Anyway, it is typically stupid of you to declare that I’m right, but because I hurt your precious feelings you won’t listen to me anyway. You’ll do what you want whether I try to persuade you nicely or if I talk to you like the swine you guys behave like.

 

[I (Don't) Have A Gun]

People trash talk me all the time here.

I'm sorry someone was mean to you on the internet, clearly it hurt you a lot. But I don't think it justifies your behaviour or your views.

 

[Stan]

I'm sorry someone was mean to you on the internet, clearly it hurt you a lot. But I don't think it justifies your behaviour or your views.

Lmao. Getting insulted and negrated by the bitter faggots and boomers who have a problem with life lessons like “churches are meant to be welcoming and affirming places of worship”, and “it’s wrong to be racist and sexist” and similar Sunday school level morality lessons is a compliment.

Heck this OP even asks “is it wrong to be against white genocide?” As if it were a real thing. May as well ask “do centaur lives matter” or “do ghosts have human rights?” And then in the next sentence he asks “why should I care about the Holocaust?” Which was real. You guys are fucked morally.

 

[Skitarii]

And then in the next sentence he asks “why should I care about the Holocaust?”

Are you ontologically retarded?