I would say humanism is when an individual is overtly concerned with rights in general. Many humanists are obsessed with animals rights and the environment. However these people are scum. Their ideal world would be a classless communist "utopia" of drug taking hippies. In order to save the world one needs to put traits like strength, intelligence and nobility above human rights. Then the weak can die off and the environment will once again thrive.
I agree with most of your points. Being an anti-humanist myself, I believe human nature is fundamentally flawed and we are a destructive species. However, the answer is not to bring in a eugenics programme and kill off 90% of people. The TRUE root of the problem is capitalism/might-makes-right caveman logic and our political leaders. We need a new economic programme and new political leaders willing to enforce policy in favour of the preservation of nature and animal species.
Animal species have feelings just as Humans do, but they are slayed anyways for "essential" uses ov a "good" lifestyle, Humanity should suffer the consequences for forwarding the urge ov hunting the Species ov God and putting them in stock as meet products, I wounder what Human flesh taste like O.o
As an anti-humanist myself, many of your points are valid. However, you come WAY too close to advocating eugenics as a solution. Furthermore, you suggest that this selection be based purely on whether the human in question contributes to civilization's domination of the planet, which contradicts fundamental tenets of this philosophy. We can control population w/out "slaughter" & should focus on limiting/enclosing civilization (or moving off the planet) & returning the rest to wild nature.
They, they, they... The problem is really with people who think THEY'RE productive while everyone else isn't. No one is really "productive" because earth doesn't need humans, only vain idiots think they're indispensible while they can slaughter everyone else. Get over yourself.,
zack dont go buying this im a passionate humanist and i dont believe that nature is simply there for me to use, its there for me to enjoy and live in harmony with. blaming the capitalistic acts of deforestation and so on, on humanism is simply ignorant. dont buy this shite.
I would say humanism is when an individual is overtly concerned with rights in general. Many humanists are obsessed with animals rights and the environment. However these people are scum. Their ideal world would be a classless communist "utopia" of drug taking hippies. In order to save the world one needs to put traits like strength, intelligence and nobility above human rights. Then the weak can die off and the environment will once again thrive.
SAEuropeanPatriot 2 days ago
I agree with most of your points. Being an anti-humanist myself, I believe human nature is fundamentally flawed and we are a destructive species. However, the answer is not to bring in a eugenics programme and kill off 90% of people. The TRUE root of the problem is capitalism/might-makes-right caveman logic and our political leaders. We need a new economic programme and new political leaders willing to enforce policy in favour of the preservation of nature and animal species.
deathblackthrashing 1 week ago
This isn't my definition of anti-humanism. My definition would be following your own struggle rather then submitting and fighting the people's wars.
DaveElectric 9 months ago
Animal species have feelings just as Humans do, but they are slayed anyways for "essential" uses ov a "good" lifestyle, Humanity should suffer the consequences for forwarding the urge ov hunting the Species ov God and putting them in stock as meet products, I wounder what Human flesh taste like O.o
X7fallensoulsX 10 months ago
As an anti-humanist myself, many of your points are valid. However, you come WAY too close to advocating eugenics as a solution. Furthermore, you suggest that this selection be based purely on whether the human in question contributes to civilization's domination of the planet, which contradicts fundamental tenets of this philosophy. We can control population w/out "slaughter" & should focus on limiting/enclosing civilization (or moving off the planet) & returning the rest to wild nature.
ashevillecat 1 year ago
They, they, they... The problem is really with people who think THEY'RE productive while everyone else isn't. No one is really "productive" because earth doesn't need humans, only vain idiots think they're indispensible while they can slaughter everyone else. Get over yourself.,
tgz1000 1 year ago
zack dont go buying this im a passionate humanist and i dont believe that nature is simply there for me to use, its there for me to enjoy and live in harmony with. blaming the capitalistic acts of deforestation and so on, on humanism is simply ignorant. dont buy this shite.
kpohanka 2 years ago
@kpohanka
what do you mean with "live in harmony with"
If you are a humanist - you believe that human has a right to reproduce?
ICE117649 2 years ago
Thank you for breaking this down for me.
ZacksEnder 2 years ago