Click to Subscribe
▶  More from Blog Guest Authors To The Point
By Eirik Bloodaxe

There is nothing better in this world than getting revenge upon one’s enemies, destroying them, utterly, today within the bounds of the law; after the collapse, by any means necessary. In a real world, not this consumer-masturbatory one, a warrior should be free to live as Genghis Khan proposed in a disputed aphorism:

“The real greatest pleasure of men is to repress rebels and defeat enemies, to exterminate them and grab everything they have; to see their married women crying, to ride on their steeds with smooth backs, to treat their beautiful queens and concubines as pajamas and pillows, to stare and kiss their rose-colored faces and to suck their sweet lips of nipple-colored.”

Here is Arnie of old, not the wimp libtard of today, saying the same, as Conan the Barbarian:

Then we have in another corner, the philosophers. I did not find much about revenge, even though restitution is an important part of the ethics of punishment. However, I found an interesting piece: G. Bar-Elli and D. Held (The Hebrew University), “Can Revenge be Just or Otherwise Justified?” “Theoria,” April 1986:

The paper is a technical piece in analytic philosophy, which means that it is impossible for our kind to try to read it in its entirety without falling into a restless slumber, punctured by nightmares, but I broke the spell by going backwards, and read the conclusion first, while chanting the name “Kant, Kant, Kant,” as I did, real quick. Try it. Why work hard when one can cheat?

“We are led to the conclusion that the paradox of revenge lies not just in its incompatibility with our idea of justice but more deeply in the inner contradiction that it displays on the emotional level of human psychology. In other words, even if justice were to be restructured so as ideally to deal with all aspects of restoration and redress, it still could not formulate rules and principles for the satisfaction of that insatiable human thirst for revenge. The desire to take revenge may be justified by the incapacity of the legal system of justice to fully restore the previous situation; but we cannot appeal to justice for help; only for condonation. Revenge can never be part of the system of justice; nor can it be justified as ‘just’. This does not mean, however that revenge cannot be morally justified. It may be regarded as morally deserved by the special kind of personal relationship in the particular situation. But as long as we are living in this world, a world in which the conventional system of social justice governs behavior, there will always be an unresolved tension between the practice of revenge and the demands of justice. The moral legitimacy of revenge can never be admitted by social justice. But since it has only limited purposes and scope, it is not surprising that justice is not always compatible with moral justifiability.”

Translated; a social theory of justice will not capture cases where people fall through the cracks of its structure and do not obtain justice, but where there is a moral legitimacy for revenge. Even normies must experience this when viewing revenge flicks like “Death Wish” (2018), where Dr Paul Kersey, the normies’ normie, turns into a vigilante because the criminal justice system is too overloaded to deliver justice in the case of the murder of his wife, and attempted murder of his daughter. Here is a scene from another great revenge flick, “Instant Death” (2017) with Big Lou, someone I have always liked more than Arnie, whose screen daughter, after brutal dual-fucking, gets one of the worst beatings dished out short of death, with eyes stabbed:

Shit, can’t find the scene on YouTube, but this low budget movie is worth looking at one rainy Saturday night, while you caress your AR 15 and its family of puppies, tipping down a beer and chewing beef jerky.

Anyway, in short, it has been argued that modern legal system arose to deal with the social problem of blood feuds and the quest for revenge. This seems to me to be yet another flaw of civilization, attempting to chain a legitimate human emotion that should never be imprisoned, for the sake of economics and fucking trade. It is just like forcing people to live with those who differ from them ethnically, racially and in terms of religion, merely to create a world where a small group of elites can live like gods.

We therefore need Tees: Fuck Civilization, Hard/Revenge: Nothing is sweeter.


The Great Train Wreck of the West

Add Comment
ShepJune 3, 2018 7:27 PM UTC

The Main Man has some thoughts on the matter:
BobJune 2, 2018 9:29 PM UTC

Here's one for you by Bruce Benson: Restitution in Theory and Practice.

The involvement of the State as mediator and judge in disputes is far from altruistic. More about the Crown's hunger for revenue. See Ch. 9, "Why Is the Public Sector So Involved

with Criminal Law Today?".