Similar posts

darreact #wingnut #dunning-kruger #elitist #racist darwinianreactionary.wordpress.com

So what is the Enlightenment view of human nature against which the Dark Enlightenment sets itself? Here we seem to have pretty strong agreement that it is the blank slate view of human nature that is not only wrong but disastrously so. (Steven Pinker’s The Blank Slate is required reading for anyone delving into these waters.) The blank slate was originally an entirely epistemological notion; it was the claim that knowledge came from the senses and that there were no innate ideas in Descartes’ sense. Restricted to this sphere it was relatively unproblematic and it is a view I share. But in the late 19th and 20th century the notion of the blank slate was extended way beyond its merely epistemological origins to encompass the entirety of human psychology. It is this expansion that the Dark Enlightenment sets itself against.

It is illuminating to understand how communism claimed it was the rational conclusion of the blank slate. Communism held that human nature is entirely malleable and that education and propaganda can shape people in any way desired. Communists held that people were so malleable that, say, parents’ affection for their children could be educated away and children could be happily abandoned to be brought up by the state, or that people’s self-interest could be overcome through education, and so people could work not for their own interests but for the benefit of the state, or that people could be educated out of their desire for material goods, and so on. The communist views were actually quite reasonable given blank slate equalism. For example, I seem remember reading somewhere that Trotsky claimed that there would be a Leonardo Da Vinci on every street corner after the revolution, and why not? If everyone is equal then inequality must be the result of social conditions. If there could be one Leonardo Da Vinci why can’t everyone be a Leonardo Da Vinci if we are all equal and society is perfected?

The official socially-approved lesson from the fall of communism is that it fell because it failed to see that people are naturally self-interested. Even uber-Lefty Peter Singer in his book Darwinian Left concedes that a political system can not require that people act against their self-interest. This is the view of the neo-liberalism that has reigned for the last 30 years: blank slate + self-interest. Neo-liberals of the right and left generally believe in the blank slate in all areas except that people are naturally materially self-interested.

SLMC1 #sexist reddit.com


1. Develop and/or mimic a sex-satisfied, not a sex-desiring, mental disposition.

Women don't consciously agree with this but their psychological firmware nevertheless insists on being attracted to men who are already getting laid. This is a very primal form of pre-selection as her mind conducts this subconscious logical syllogism: "I don't know whether this man is fit for reproduction but the fact that there are signs that he may be already getting laid (he's not desperate, he's barely trying, he's already happy and cheerful) would suggest that other women have already made the assessment that he is."

There are two differing and mutually compatible ways of cultivating this sex-satisfied state (abundance mentality). One is to actually induce it by having sex with women regularly, going as low on the SMV totem pole as is needed to get laid. The other is to mimic it by artificially altering your behavior and demeanor to match the patterns of someone who is getting laid. There is no shame in this: Just avoid like the plague any behavior that she could identify as needy, desperate, or sexually frustrated. This requires you to constantly watch yourself, which is exhausting, so I don't recommend adopting this 2nd technique exclusively.

Heartiste illustrated this point well when he said (paraphrased) "When you don't know what to say to a woman, imagine that you're already lying in bed with two of them." There is a lot to be gained by haggling your way down in the sexual marketplace just so you can be getting laid regularly. I am open to the idea that other male personality types might prefer to not have sex at all than to have sex with a low-SMV female but I would argue that that preference is born of low testosterone or an over-reliance on masturbation and pornography. There appear to be two camps in TRP. One says "fuck women" and the other says "fuck women." I am of the latter.

2. Treat her as if she was born to serve you.

The most attractive combination of psychological traits in a man are narcissism and happiness. The latter has some overlap with our discussion about sex-satiety but the former is separate.

Narcissism for our purposes here is delusional self-confidence and reckless self-interest. It's the characteristic of a man who has massive double-standards regarding himself versus the women he dates, and he knows it, and he laughs when he's called out on it. Developing a specific, strategically deployable form of narcissism with respect to the opposite sex is tricky and every man will integrate this property into their existing social personality differently, but one trick I've found useful is to use a sort of affirmation or article of faith to undo and rewire the beta programming that the mind uses when interacting with women.

An anonymous comment in the manosphere once described it this way: "Act like you are the star of the #1 reality show of all time: cameras following you around and millions watching it because you are so damn interesting." In short, brainwash yourself into believing that you're a god. Eventually you may learn that this lie is actually true.

Learned-narcissism mirrors pre-selection closely. In pre-selection a woman doesn't have enough information to know whether you are fit for reproduction so she uses the judgments of other women to make that evaluation. With narcissism and delusional self-confidence, a woman doesn't have enough information to know whether you are fit for reproduction so she uses the judgment that you have made about yourself to make that evaluation. I assume it goes without saying that a woman isn't consciously considering you as a reproductive mate when she's discovering whether she wants to fuck you. This is all subconscious psychological phenomena that she herself has no direct awareness of. All she consciously experiences is a desire to fuck you.

While betas exist to serve women, women exist to serve alphas. Sometimes this dynamic is subtle; othertimes women will explicitly enjoy being or feeling used up by their alpha male partners. Treat her a little bit like she exists to serve you to establish the desired alpha-to-female relationship pattern.

3. Ignore anything and everything she says that you would have preferred she didn't say.

The most efficient and benevolent method of extracting the desired value out of the interactions you have with females is to punish and reward her by giving and withdrawing your attention. Counter-intuitively, ignoring a woman when she acts or speaks in an undesired way is more effective in disincentivizing than is confronting her verbally or even using physical violence.

This is because ignoring a woman communicates a greater readiness to withdraw from her permanently. This demonstrates value and instills insecurity in her; whereas verbal confrontation communicates to her that she is his only option and that he's more inclined to try to control her than he is to merely gravitate away from negativity and undesired behavior and in the direction of other females from whom he knows he can procure a preferable relationship.

If a girl you're interacting with asks an unwanted question or makes an unwanted statement, flatly ignore it. I'm not suggesting that you fold your arms like a frustrated kid and give her the silent treatment. I am suggesting that you literally act exactly as if she had not said it at all. This is frame-reaffirmation. It's the most effective and efficient way of dealing with her bullshit and is especially preferable to verbal confrontation if either of you are prone to the slippy slope of escalating negative emotions.

There is a recurring and compelling sentiment here that the sexual marketplace is a zero-sum game. I believe this is only the case when men fail to learn how to calibrate male-female interaction patterns to satisfy the self-interested nature of the male and the alpha-pleasing instincts of the female—instead of the self-interested nature of the female and the female-pleasing instincts of the male.

Atavisionary #fundie atavisionary.com

He complains (rightly) that the progs in the entertainment industry use their influence over plot lines to create propaganda for children, when they are least able to critically evaluate it and so soak that crap in like a sponge. I remember once we were talking about education around my teenage nephew and he, at different points, both said “that is sexist” and “that is racist.” Poor guy. This is probably more to do with the school system than cartoons, but same difference (same same, but different?). Keep in mind that I do sort of, maybe try to tone myself down at family events. Apparently dismissing blog posts isn’t the only thing I do halfheartedly. After the third or so statement of this sort, being the cold-hearted, insensitive asshole I am, I responded with “reality is racist” and he suddenly seemed to be deep in thought. I didn’t hear about being racist again. It turns out crazy uncles might have more influence than low-IQ education majors! Who knew?

In any event, I almost never watch TV anymore except stuff I can be very preselective with on the internet for this very reason. Every time I give a show a chance, which is rare anymore, I am invariably disappointed and disgusted by the progressive parasites infesting the story. For example, I like gore and zombies. Who doesn’t? I was told The Walking Dead was a pretty decent show and reluctantly gave it a chance. The first 4 seasons were on netflix so I watched them. For the most part it was pretty good, but they just can’t leave out the prog propaganda. A mindless show revolving around killing zombies can’t just be about killing zombies; it also must be progressive. At least the progs finally did something right though, a post-apocalyptic wasteland seems the appropriate setting and endpoint of progressivism. The third and final straw happened in the last episode in which they introduced some gay dudes and had them make out. Ya, I am not shitting you. The gay dudes make out in the show. I have a very bad feeling that those two are going to stay on as characters for a long time. I am not going to find out, though, because I am done watching it. It isn’t that I have anything against gays, like everything else in human psychology (most importantly intelligence), I am pretty sure it has biological origins and that they are unfortunate misfits born with a bad combination of alleles. Gnon was not kind to them. But understanding that does not mean I want to see them make out (or have civilization cater to them or give them special victim status). Even then, that isn’t even the major problem for me (though it is an important problem). The major problem is the er…hrmm northern aggression of it all. It is the fact that these assholes can’t keep their fucking values to themselves. They HAVE to try to propagandize me and everyone else who don’t want to have anything to do with them or their values; even if we would never bother or hinder them in their personal lives at all if they just left us alone. It isn’t enough that I am (or was) willing to just let them be if they let me be. They HAVE to get in my face about it. Fuck them. Goodbye libertarianism.

...

It isn’t that other people have different values that bothers me, it is that people are trying to forcibly push their values on me and others who may be ambivalent or in strong disagreement. Most important is that the values they push are objectively shit. Ya, maybe I haven’t been a paragon of virtue in the past, but at least when pressed I can objectively evaluate what values are best for civilization as a whole. I don’t pretend like self-interested behavior is anything other than self-interested behavior. If people disagree with a set of values they should be able to disassociate and allow Gnon to be the judge of who is right or wrong. We aren’t being allowed that privilege. This northern aggression can not stand.

EDIT: I just remembered there was another thing that was dumb in the show. There was a group at a hospital being lead by a small framed women. This was just stupid, in such an apocalyptic setting strength and endurance are what matter most and men wouldn’t follow someone who would never be able to keep up with them. Post-institutions affirmative action would not apply and she would have been demoted to a support role she was actually suited to.

Whysomangry #sexist columbinemassacre.forumotion.com

I think he was primarily speaking of the biological nature of the female half of the human species. They are built to care. In the same way they care for children, they care for the material in this world. Women are considered frivolous for this reason. They care about diamonds and pearls, they care about aesthetic beauty, they care about every last facet of a man so as to weigh his worth. They care about intelligence, strength, power, skill, etc. Caring cuts down to the bone of women whether they care for children or for money or material locations (Paris, etc)

It is this tendency to care for things that gives them desire, and, as the opposite of loyal (man), women are primarily concerned with themselves and their own interests. There is no true loyalty in the mind of a woman. There is only self-interest. Women see the weak and defective, and they care for them and then walk away. In their natural habit they would never let a weakling have sexual intercourse with them. This is the fundamental driver of evolution. Women are the gate keepers of sex. This is why Nietzsche considered them higher life-forms than men. They are so self-interested and manipulative that, on a certain level, they do not see others as human beings, they see tools to get things they want. A terribly feminine woman just wants admiration (something they care about) once they've got acceptance in a tribe.

They just want to be seen as a grand, superior life-form that is higher in rank than those around it. The rank matters because it is a measure of worth, and worth is something women care about. It's just will to power in action. Women use their ability to care to see every last bit of another human being, and they manipulate others to get what they need. Women don't even feel negative emotions in the same way that men do, their amygdala activates differently, so they are better at emotional recollection than emotional experience. It would be disadvantageous for women to really understand human emotion as it would be retard their ability to freely manipulate and use. For men have historically been nothing more than tools to women. If you pay attention, you'll find that women selfishly have kids even though they're well aware life is hell, and someday their children will suffer over what they've done.

Women are constantly leaving men for something superior. It's sad but true. You, of course, get exceptions to rules, but it's rare. This is probably what Lanza meant by selfish. They are not built that way through society. It is in their blood and bones to choose the superior life form and run with it. This is why so many mass-shooters hate women. They are aware of what they truly are, and it takes a sufficient amount of time in isolation to realize it. This is what Adam Lanza saw in his mother. "I want what I want, and you're coming whether you want to or not." This is what Adam thought about his mother as she forced him onto this earth, forced onto him her "love" so that he became weak in a brutal society, and then forced him out of his cocoon.

Women really are selfish. My father has seen it. I have seen it, and Adam Lanza has seen it... It can't be helped. They are highly evolved lifeforms that perpetuate the species, and they must be fundamentally cruel so it is driven forward.

darreact #wingnut #dunning-kruger #elitist #racist darwinianreactionary.wordpress.com

Third, loyalty is not a case of manipulation or false consciousness. If genocide is one of the greatest crimes of which humanity is capable, then people must justifiably be able to resist it when it is imposed upon their kind. Extinction is the worst of evils that can befall a kind, and those that sacrifice some present self-interest out of loyalty should receive the highest moral praise for their efforts at avoiding this greatest of evils. In fact, altruistic self-sacrifice is often considered the essence of morality. Again, if a member of an ethnic group stays in a neighborhood, state, or country out of loyalty, when moving might be better from self-interest, this is a moral act of the highest order. Instead, there is a natural existential imperative demanding loyalty to ones kind when loyalty is necessary for any kind to persist. When threatened with genocide those groups whose members do not demonstrate loyalty go extinct, and so the prevention is genocidal.

There are three kinds of loyalty that correspond to the factors discussed in parts 2 – 4: loyalty to ones people, loyalty to ones ethnic, religious, and cultural traditions, and loyalty to place. There may be other important kinds of loyalty, such as institutional loyalty–loyalty to ones teammates, partners, family, leader, military commander, and so on—but it is these three types that are genocide-resistant.

Thus society needs to gain new respect for loyalty and the loyal, and a new disdain for the traitorous as loyalty is the highest of virtues as it avoids the greatest of calamities. Disloyalty, as was traditionally claimed, is the worst of vices; Dante condemned the traitorous to the lowest level of hell. A full discussion of how the disloyal should be treated, and what, if any, the penalty should be for disloyalty, is beyond the scope of this post. But several general points could be made. How to produce loyalty is an ancient problem. Perhaps disloyalty should be illegal. But it seems grossly extreme to charge someone as a traitor who, say, chooses to not bring their child up in their traditional faith. On the other hand, being a traitor to ones country is generally considered a great offense and is punishable with the most severe penalty, even death. In between state enforcement and unfettered license lay social pressure and stigma, and this seems a far more reasonable way to treat certain kinds of disloyalty: the disloyal should be ostracized and shamed the way the Amish or Hasidim do.

Mack Major #fundie edendecoded.com

When the LGBT and those who support the gay agenda celebrate 'free love' and 'love wins,' THIS is what you are really supporting. This is what homosexuality REALLY looks like.

Because when you engage in, practice or support any element of the LGBT lifestyle, you're really supporting Baphomet

Baphomet is simply another term or name for Lucifer... better known as the Serpent, Satan and the Devil.

Below is a description of Baphomet. You'll notice that he has female breasts.

This is because from ancient times until the present, Satan has always been depicted as being both male AND female, with BOTH genitalia (female breasts and a male penis).

While going through different images for the new book, it suddenly dawned on me: THIS is why there is such an interest in transsexuals, lesbians and bisexuals in our society today.

Notice how Baphomet, aka Satan, appears to be BOTH genders: as evidenced by the female breasts?

Satan is depicted as bi-gender in 99% of the images you'll run across. Which officially makes the devil the very first transsexual in history!

Now you see why the Bruce Jenner transformation was such a huge story. This world is run and literally controlled by devil worshipers. They control 90% of the media, music, movies, tv, news outlets and even some social media outlets.

The only agenda these flunkies of Satan promote is their own: which is really Satan's agenda. Hence why television seems so slanted when you watch it, and obviously programming a pro-gay anti-God agenda.

And when you see LGBT being promoted and supported on a wide scale, these are followers of Satan bringing their god out of hiding and into the light. Coming out of the closet was never meant for homosexuals: it was actually meant for Satan!

The Bible even seems to hint that the Anti-Christ will be of a homosexual nature when he arrives on the scene.

"Neither shall he (the antichrist) regard the God of his fathers, NOR THE DESIRE OF WOMEN, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all." *Daniel 11:37

As we get closer to the closing of this age before Jesus Christ returns to take over the world, expect to see more of Satan and his antics on open display like never before. Like the unveiling of Satanic statues in places like Detroit or Oklahoma City.

The designer of those statues very cleverly hid the female breast part of the statues, so it wouldn't be too obvious or offensive to the unsuspecting public. As if a big statue of Satan wasn't already offensive enough...

The Bible says that Satan knows his time is short.

"Therefore, rejoice, O heavens and you who dwell in them! But woe to you, O earth and sea, for the devil has come down to you in great wrath, because he knows that his time is short!" *Rev 12:12

Meaning that any chance he has to delay or prevent the return of Christ, he has to take it now. (He knows he cannot stop it: but his hope is in delaying Jesus' return for as long as possible: thus extending his inevitable torment and punishment).

Transexualism and bisexuality is promoted as openly as it is today because these are characteristics and trademarks of the Devil's very own nature.

His nature is bisexuality, homosexuality and confusing the different genders, and mixing the holy with the profane. It's how he defiles people and keeps them from ever being able to connect with God and live a life of sexual cleanliness and holiness.

Just be aware that his tremendous push to normalize homosexual/bisexual and transsexual behavior is more evidence that the appearance of the anti-Christ is near. It's evidence of an old ancient devil-worshiping religion making a comeback in so-called "Christian" America.

I've been telling people for some time now that America's real religion is Individualism: the religion of self-interest above everything and everyone else.

And the religion of Individualism is driving American consumerism and the US economy today. This is what Satanism is at its core.

Self-interest is what led the founding fathers of America to violate every Christian principle in the book.

•by enslaving black people,
•raping black women;
•raping and murdering Native women and their children,
•enslaving Irish immigrants;
•and later by installing Jim Crow, then modifying Jim Crow today through crafty laws and cunning legislation that still deprives a huge segment of the population of its God-granted rights.

Sidenote: Have you ever noticed that whenever you see old lynching photos of a Black Man his pants have been 'pulled down?' How'd they get that way? And what was the fascination the lynchers had with pulling down another man's pants? I'm not trying to suggest anything, or maybe I am... but that's another article for another day.

Even the layout for Washington D.C. was designed off of occult symbolism as seen below. Not the Baphomet Star, the Masonic compass, and the so-called 'Star of David': which is NOT a godly symbol at all, but was really an occult symbol used by King Solomon to conjure demons with.

Anton Levay, the founder of the Church of Satan, said in so many words that most Americans were really Satanists too: they just hadn't realized it yet.

This is because Satanism is basically a religion of self-pleasure, self-fulfillment and self-indulgence.

It's the forbidden fruit Satan used to trick Eve and Adam to indulge in. And it's the doorway that led us to this very point in America today, where a man is confused about his own gender and role, and so are many women.

Sadly, too many churches have become Satanist in doctrine and creed. Why else would flaming homosexual men and women feel comfortable sitting in church without changing?

"Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error." Romans 1:24-27

It's time for Christians to stand up for Jesus Christ like never before.

The strong delusion has already been released. And if you're not careful, you'll get sucked right into the vortex.

Christians say they would never bow the knee to Satan. But the truth is: if you're all about self-love and self-pleasure anyway, you're already following his belief system.

[...]

If you're someone who is struggling with homosexuality, there is powerful deliverance in store for you. Jesus Christ is a MIGHTY deliverer.

There is no sin so powerful or dirty that His blood cannot overpower and cleanse it completely.

"Come now, let us reason together, says the LORD: though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool." Isa 1:18

"I, even I am, he who blots out your trangressions, for my own sake, and remembers your sins no more." Isa 43:25

Jesus will give you a brand new life, a new heart and help you to develop a new mindset. You can literally become a NEW person through Jesus Christ! All you have to do is sincerely want it, and be willing to leave your former LGBT lifestyle (or whatever sinful lifestyle) behind, in favor of the brand new life that Jesus has in store for you.

Craig Biddle #fundie theobjectivestandard.com

Since capitalism is the only social system in which the courts uphold the principles of objective law—since it is the only social system in which the government protects individual rights (including property rights)—since it is the only social system in which people can act fully according to their own judgment and thus live fully as human beings—capitalism is the only moral social system.

But, one might ask, what about the poor, the disabled, and the helpless? How do they fare under laissez-faire? To answer this question, we must bear in mind that very few people are genuinely helpless or unable to support themselves; the great majority of people are capable of acting as their life requires. And if a person chooses to live and is capable of supporting himself, he has a moral responsibility to do so; if he refuses to support himself and, instead, steals, begs, or seeks handouts, he is acting parasitically and immorally.

With this in mind, let us consider the position of the poor, the disabled, and the helpless in a truly capitalist system. But we must take them one at a time, for they are not necessarily one and the same. As to the poor: Capitalism leaves each individual free to think, work, and make as much money as he is willing and able to earn. No other social system on earth does this. In a capitalist society, if a poor person wants to work his way out of poverty—as countless poor people have done—he is fully free to do so. Of course, if he doesn’t want to, he doesn’t have to; the choice is his to make, and no one can force him one way or the other.

Some people are not concerned with being wealthy, but this does not make them immoral. While an artist or a gardener might be financially poor, he is not by that fact less moral than a CEO or an athlete who is financially rich. A person’s monetary wealth does not determine his moral status. His choices and actions do: Are they rational or irrational—life-promoting or life-retarding, selfish or selfless, honest or dishonest? Morally speaking, that is what matters. If having more money is honestly important to a person, he should act accordingly by, for instance, seeking a higher-paying job, investing his money more wisely, or starting a business of his own. And capitalism not only leaves everyone—including the poor—completely free to do so; it also provides an ever-increasing flow of educational possibilities and moneymaking opportunities.

As to the disabled: Capitalism leaves them free to compensate for their disabilities by means of any remaining abilities they might have. Again, no other social system on earth does this. In a capitalist society, if a person lacks ability in some respect but still has abilities in other respects, he is fully free to use his existing abilities to support and further his life—as many disabled people do. For instance: A deaf person might choose to pursue a career in genetics, architecture, or accounting. A blind person might choose to pursue a career in music, radio, or psychology. A paraplegic might choose to pursue a career in law, education, or writing. And today—with the technology made possible by freer markets—even a quadriplegic can learn to support himself; he might pursue a career in finance, economics, or computer programming.

When disabled people are fully free to act on their judgment, there is usually something they can do to compensate for their shortcomings. And capitalism not only leaves them completely free to do so; it also makes available an ever-increasing flow of enabling technology.

Now, as to the helpless: It is crucial here to acknowledge that very few people actually fall into this extremely unfortunate category. At this point, we are talking only about people who are severely retarded, have a totally debilitating disease, or are injured to the extent that they are unable to support themselves by any means. What happens to such people in a laissez-faire society? Capitalism leaves each individual free to offer them as much charity as he is able and willing to offer. Once again, no other social system on earth does this. In a capitalist society, if a person has the means and the desire to assist the helpless—as many people do—he is fully free to do so. Of course, if he doesn’t have the means, he can’t offer them assistance. And whether he has the means or not, if he doesn’t want to, he doesn’t have to; the choice is his to make, and no one can force him one way or the other.

But, one might wonder, what if everyone’s rights are respected, yet no one wants to help the helpless.

As always, to address this concern we must observe the relevant facts. What the helpless need but cannot produce is life-serving values; that’s what makes them helpless. Such values can be produced only by able people; hence the term able. But able people can produce values only if they are free to act on the very thing that makes them able: their judgment. The basic social condition that makes human life possible is freedom—freedom from the initiation of physical force—the freedom of each individual to act on the judgment of his own mind.

Thus, respect for individual rights is as much in the best interest of the helpless as it is in the best interest of the able—if not more so. Think about it: If the able are not free, they cannot live (as human beings); and if the able cannot live, what happens to the helpless? Clearly, if the helpless are to be helped, they (and everyone who cares about them) must respect individual rights—including the rights of the able.

Observe further that while in reality there are very few genuinely helpless people, when individual rights are respected there are plenty of people who are willing and able to help them. Look around: Do you ever see people working with the mentally retarded? Ask your friends: Would they ever donate money to help a poor child with leukemia? Ask yourself: Would you ever offer assistance to a victim of a devastating accident? Consider this: Even in the semi-free, mixed economy of the United States today—in which producers are heavily and immorally taxed—the amount of money voluntarily donated to charity is enormous; in 1999 alone, tax-strapped Americans gave over $190 billion to charity.But, one might suppose, isn’t that because people are partly altruistic and not fully selfish? Why would a true egoist ever want to help the helpless?

To be sure, a truly selfish person would not offer “help” to bums who are in fact not “helpless” but rather choose to be parasites. Only a fool or an altruist would do that. But to answer the question of why an egoist would ever want to help people who genuinely cannot support themselves, we need only consider the alternatives—of which there are two: A person can either help the helpless or not help them. So here is the question every egoist has to answer for himself. Which environment do I think is in my best interest: one in which genuinely helpless people suffer and die in the streets, or one in which I voluntarily contribute some small fraction of my time, effort, or money to give them a hand?

I certainly know which environment is in my best interest, and I imagine you know which is in yours. But this is something every individual has to decide for himself—and no one has a moral right to force him one way or the other. Fortunately, the decision does not require advanced mathematics; it merely requires genuine self-interest, reverence for human life, and basic logic.

Rational egoism, true egoism, does not say: “Be indifferent to other human beings” or “Don’t help people.” It says: “If one wants to live as a human being and achieve genuine happiness, one must observe reality; one must think; one must not accept contradictions; one must pursue one’s life-serving values; one must not surrender greater values for the sake of lesser ones; one must be honest; one must have integrity”; and so on. If a person thinks that helping certain other people is in his best interest, he should act accordingly. And capitalism not only leaves everyone completely free to do so; it also enables people to create enormous amounts of surplus wealth with which to do it.

When people are free to produce as much wealth as they are able and willing to produce—and free to do with their wealth whatever they choose to do with it—many people become very rich. Add to this the fact that truly self-interested people care about human life—they, after all, are the ones who recognize that it is the standard of moral value—and thus do not want other human beings to suffer and die needlessly, and we have a clear answer to the question, “What if no one wants to help the helpless?” The concern is simply unwarranted. The fact is that many people—including presumably the people who ask the question—do want to help the helpless. And in a truly capitalist society, no one would be allowed to stop them.

Atavisionary #racist atavisionary.com

To those who are paying attention, there is a lot of anti-white sentiments in our culture and they seem to be increasing at a dramatic rate year after year. You can see this article written that seeks to ban whites from holding elected office in student governments in Britain. Considering Britain is a natively white country, the audaciousness is astounding. That it is published in a mainstream newspaper, rather than some fringe blog, is even more concerning. In another example, a student banned white men from her organization then claimed she wasn’t racist because racism is a quality unique to whites. Sure. Or racism is a word used to attack whites by other ethnic groups, and that power isn’t as helpful if whites can use it too. There are plenty of other examples, but this drives the point home. A significant portion of society hates white people, and white males especially, and would like nothing better than to turn us all into second class citizens; in our own countries. Enough people agree with this that they can publish such articles and opinions in mainstream outlets. It isn’t clear that they won’t succeed either.

Knowing the attitudes of these people towards myself and people like me makes it very clear that they are my enemy. They want to see me and my kin reduced to nothing politically, socially, and economically. They probably would love to see us all dead too; though they usually avoid stating this preference publicly. Usually.

I didn’t ask for this. I have never gone out of my way to inconvenience anyone because of their race or gender. I would have loved to continue on neutral to the whole business of identity politics. This sort of increasing and outspoken aggression has convinced me to take a side. My side; which in this case means my people’s side. Since whites are being attacked as group, they must resist as a group. There are still many whites who have yet to realize this important turning point in their attitudes, but as the rhetoric against whites continues to increase, so will the willingness to “pick a side” increase. In theory, people will tend to pick the side that best promotes their personal interests; at least when things become saliently dire. In this case, that means picking the side of anyone that promotes a positive white identity; and if you look around there are preciously few groups with such a message. Given the candidates, I worry that this may end up very badly for a lot of people. Still, if forced to do so, I will choose which ever group is available and has its interests aligned with my own. If there is only one group which will protect my person and my interests as a white male, then the choice will be a no-brainer based purely on self-interest. Here’s to hoping against worse case scenarios, though.

One method of attempting to turn the tables on enemies, hopefully well before anything nasty happens, is to take their rhetoric and reconnotate or redefine it. By redefining racism as something justified and worthwhile, by showing drastically contrasting stats for criminal acts for example, you could make it so people no longer have to dodge the accusation. In fact, they may even embrace it. The attack term thus looses its claws and can even become an asset. There are many terms which could, with variable levels of difficulty, be redefined in such a way (racism has a long way to go, though). Some time ago, there was a very good article which conceded “white privilege” as a concept worth discussing, but that it was not something that white people just got because they happened to be white. White privilege is a normative commons that white people as a group earn by foregoing opportunity costs. For example, stores where whites are the main customers can leave their merchandise out in the open and unguarded because whites as a group accept the opportunity cost of not stealing. As a group they support the normative commons of having open selections. Some other ethnicities support similar normative commons, and may even have commons unique to them, while others do not. The groups who do not support such commons and regularly steal items from stores are faced with straight-forward results; merchandise is kept behind the counter or there is a heavy security presence. Is this racism? Well, racist is just another word for someone who accepts the reality of group differences, so I guess so. Nothing wrong with that at all.

This is a nice bit of white magic, but I think we can go even further. White privilege can be more than an abstraction; it can be a consciously pursued policy. Basically, white privilege is something whites should actively work towards granting other whites. When given a choice, say you have a project and have a series of different people to choose to hire, choose the white male. Choose the option that keeps the benefits within your in-group. Clearly the government limits choice for many businesses, but there are still opportunities where white males can be consciously favored by other white males. Do so every chance you can get without running afoul of the law (or when the eye of Sauron won’t spot you). We must still render unto Caesar, and thus follow the laws even when they are absurd, harm ourselves, and harm our group because we are not in a position of sovereignty, but that doesn’t mean we are completely unable to act. (The restrictions suck, but it is what it is).

The way I see it, as a white male I do not owe anything to anyone who hasn’t earned it. I especially do not owe anything to groups of people who regularly and without shame call for using the government to increase the difficulties for me and my kin; in the countries that were single-handedly built by MY ancestors, not theirs. Anyone who has applied for a job in recent years gets a constant reminder of anti-white discrimination on every. single. application. I think the constant reminder of the state of things is what is most frustrating. Businesses are forced to preferentially hire minorities over me, regardless of relative merits. If I can go out of my way to return the favor by discriminating against the people who discriminate against me, then I will. Quite happily I might add.

Even so, I realize that most people of any group are just trying to get along with their lives. I do not, and do not advocate, going out of the way to inconvenience or harm them. What I am advocating is going out of your way to benefit your in-group whenever possible. Given a choice, pick the option which ends up helping the white male. The other people are merely left at a neutral position; or to pursue similar treatment from their own co-ethnics. Undoubtedly they receive it all the time. Other than whites, all groups do this as a normal part of their lives and culture; and there is nothing wrong with it. There is no reason we shouldn’t also.

Recently, I was faced with such a decision. I needed some work performed and I posted a job to a forum asking for applications. I was given 10 or so options to choose from. Most of the applicants were ethnic minorities from other countries and two were white male Americans. As far as quality of work goes, most seemed perfectly capable of completing the project successfully based on their portfolios. Some of the foreign labor even had more references than the white males. At the end of the day I decided to use racism to help me with my decision. I gave the job to one of the white males, and the deciding factor was his identity as a white male. I couldn’t be happier with the results of the contract either. It exceeded my expectations.

Though granting white privilege purely to benefit your in-group is worthwhile on its own, it also increases the probability you will be the beneficiary of a higher quality performance or have better work completed. As a group, you know that whites have a long history called western civilization in which they collectively performed very well. There are exceptions, but you increase your probability of success by choosing someone from a group with a good track record. Not to mention group differences in IQ tests. By that logic, you could also use racism successfully in choosing whom to hire even when a white male isn’t an option. Northeast Asians, like the Japanese, would also be very likely to provide good labor. So would ethnic Indians (dot, not the feather). By applying your knowledge of group differences discriminately, you are more likely to get the quality you want. Though, you still have to work within the bounds of the law.

A person who utilizes white privilege in their business dealings is moral because to benefit your in-group is moral self interest. I am not saying that someone shouldn’t have to earn their white privilege, they do, but if they can then you help yourself by selectively helping them. Or, that would be true if most whites would act this way because the benefits would eventually hit everyone in the community. It is something worth working toward. In addition, you are also more likely to get higher quality work, and are less likely to be screwed over. European high trust societies mean that whites generally are more trustworthy as a result of their genetic inheritance. As savvy as Asians are at building civilizations, there is a reason they prefer to invest in governments, banks, and other institutions that are primarily European run. As a group, Europeans tend to engage in corruption less often and therefore their money is safer than with their own co-ethnics.

So be proud of your white privilege. Be proud to grant white privilege. Its a good thing, use it. You’ve earned it.

Jethreezy #fundie reddit.com

(So what, men who have kids are allowed to remarry but women aren't?)

Of course they're allowed, and if they can find some sucker, then they've basically hit the jackpot from a self-interest perspective. It's just that no self-respecting successful man would want them.

Cretus Clawfinger #fundie reddit.com

Modern leftism is such an extreme aberration in that it requires white majorities to support policies explicitly opposed to their own tribal self-interest, that any movement intelligently articulating a return to sanity was bound to be successful absent repression or censorship, which was made impossible by the internet. Rational self interest fused with ethnic/national tribalism of one kind or another is the default mode of being for all peoples throughout world history. Those groups that lacked this sense or the power to assert it were selected out of existence or absorbed into more dominant cultures. The 50 or so year vacation from this in the West is the result of the miserable failure of the disasterous Nazi regime mixed with the unparalleled material wealth that made the moralistic indulgence of mass 3rd world immigration seem tolerable. The west has now reached a tipping point of no return demographically where this continued indulgence will lead to cultural and biological erasure, while finally beginning to threaten the economic security of comfortable bourgiouse that are running out of territory to flee too.
The situation is self evident...it's not complicated or hard to understand. This perspective aligns with natural human tribal intuitions so it's as easy to convince the low IQ as it is the spergy autists once you break their conditioning. Additionally, leftist discourse has degraded to be solely defined by a facile, hysterical identity politics which is every bit as bigoted, racist, and violent as they project onto the far right (if not more so in some respects). The hypocrisy of this is glaringly obvious. In light of this, my view is not "look how perfect the altright movement is" but, "what took so long?"
White (trash) nationalism has been around for a long time. Pre alt-right/European New Right, all it has accomplished is to help Jews and leftists defame white people and the advocacy of white interests by larping as cartoonish boogeyman while cheerleading needlessly inflammatory failed ideologies of the past. Overcoming the stigma of these losers is now the main impediment to white tribalists achieving their goals.
The alt right is successful to the extent that they have chucked this paradigm for something new. They've been extraordinarily successful, with strengths and weaknesses abound. I think this should be less surprising than it may appear given the historical forces at play and the easy victory the left has handed them by abandoning truth for feelings and avoiding debate in favor of shrill moralizing.
Criticizing the alt right is not to reject it as a whole, and much more useful than just mindlessley cheerleading whatever putrid vulgarities are trending on the daily stormer. There are good reasons that the left was able to deconstruct white nationalism 1.0 and any movement that has a chance at victory should be resilient to these critiques.
And don't give me "the enemy doesn't punch left, why should we?" horseshit. Yes they do. Some Marxist whackjob blabbering about beheading landowners would be exiled from all but the most dope soaked antifa squat. There's obviously use in not respecting, or being confined by, leftist taboos. Nazi frog trolling can be funny and may have its limited place. Becoming the monsters the left accuses you of being is just the opposite side of the coin of allowing leftists to define you. You're shucking and jiving for the cameras like a white minstrel show. If the left accuses you of pedophilia, you don't start fucking kids just to piss them off.

Roosh #fundie rooshv.com

As recently as three years ago I started noticing the flaws of evolution from self-examining my behavior and those of my hypersexual male peers, because you don’t pick up a book titled “Darwinian Fairytales” unless you already harbored serious doubts about the theory. I must admit that I made a mistake to use evolution as a reason to whore around with women when it was clear as day that I did not aim to reproduce. The behavior I did enact for so long can best be explained as entertainment seeking, relieving a lack of purpose in life, and wanting to feel masculine, but there was nothing evolutionary about it, and it has not at all increased my reproductive success than had I been an introverted 22-year-old and told my father to arrange a marriage for me with a girl from his Iranian hometown.

With this review I don’t aim to completely throw evolution under the bus, for it does apply quite nicely to other organisms, and natural selection has surely applied to humans during certain periods of their history, but it should not and can not be used to describe current human behavior, including your own, because any set of conditions that put humans through an evolutionary grinder are no longer present in modern civilization. Doing otherwise would be deception on a large scale, and I won’t deceive myself further by using it, even if it reduces scientific backing for some of my ideas.

Without using evolution as a tool, there is a big question that must be answered: where does traditional sex roles—and behavior—come from? Or more precisely: what are the correct sex roles for humans? The answer to the second is easier than the first. The correct sex roles are what has sustained human populations and society in the past and what will sustain human populations and society in the future. Biology need not be taken into account.

A careful study of history can clearly show what happens when men step outside of their traditional roles and what happens when women step outside of theirs, something spending ten minutes on Tumblr can verify. What are the sex roles and proper behavior of humans that allow a sustainable and mentally healthy population without ushering in the policies that would lead to a cultural collapse? The answer is the sex roles we already are familiar with, ones that have been known since Biblical times.

It’s a natural human urge to understand the “why” of how life came about, a question that was no doubt asked by the first man. The problem in answering with evolution is that—besides it being wrong—it locks your mind into a narrow perspective. Thinking that all humans act in genetic self interest clouds all your thoughts on human behavior and prevents you from seeing obvious contradictions and hidden truths. Because you have firm faith in evolution, you are not even allowing your mind to consider another viewpoint.

Say you encounter an article that says the following: “Men who go off to war have more children than men who don’t.” Evolution would describe this by saying that women want to reproduce with men who are most fit and strong and better able to defend the tribe. But let’s flip it and say “Men who don’t go off to war have more children than men who do.” Evolution can describe this too! It can say, “A superior reproductive strategy is to stay with the fertile women and reproduce with them during the time the alpha males are away.” Even the simplest of minds can find an explanation once it already knows the final result it’s aiming for.

If evolution can be used to explain both sides of the coin, which is often does, it’s not a scientific theory but a rationalization theory that justifies any and all human behavior as somehow fitting the theory. In other words, the theory is like playdough that can fit in any situation, and this is even done in the red pill portion of the manopshere to take any behavior a man or woman does and somehow justify it in terms of evolution, even if it’s based on people acting on the willful mission to not reproduce. What’s convenient for evolutionists is that none of their assertions can be proven, meaning that evolution is not more than one step above astrology in terms of describing or predicting human behavior. It’s gibberish.

Darwin’s theory came at the right time of history. The monarchy was overthrown and scientific rationalism dominated the day. The missing piece to complete the Enlightenment was a way to kill god, and Darwin came forth with a brilliant theory that did the job. The only problem is that it’s not true for humans, at least not in the way for other forms of life on earth.

There must be something else motivating and driving human beings that can’t be explained by current science, and so therefore the science we have is unable to provide a definitive and consistent account of our origin story along with our behavior. This means that if you are using evolution to structure, organize, or explain your own life, you are living a falsehood—a soothing falsehood but a falsehood nonetheless.

I must state that it’s not a comfortable position for me to neither believe in god or human evolution, for I have no working model for my own existence. It’s a weird place because my brain, for some reason, craves an origin story for where it came from. It’s searching, hunting, for something that explains how it got here, but I will be patient in this search, because I find it liberating and free that I no longer have to frame every human action through the lens of “survive and reproduce” and “all humans act in self-interest to spread their genes.”

Now that I have done this, it’s much easier to see how reproduction is not an important or essential human behavior and that evolution is nothing more than a severely flawed theory for explaining human beings.

Arodion #racist stormfront.org

For anyone who thinks that we cannot do anything because we don't have the numbers - go ahead and read the first couple of chapters in the 2nd volume of Mein Kampf and you will learn that it has been done before. Back then, in the 1920's Germany was essentially under Jewish Communist rule, but our forefathers still managed to assemble a grassroots movement from zero. If you read Mein Kampf carefully, then you will also notice that while the Führer had very harsh words against those politicians and the very aspect of "democracy", he openly welcomed those Marxist workers to attend their rallies because he was confident in his abilities of educating them and freeing them from their Jewish chains.

National Socialism worked because it considered itself to be an ideology - a way how viewing the world - with the clear and strong ambition of uniting all Aryans under its umbrella. It was not by any means a German movement, but merely a White movement - though there were some misconceptions about the role of the Slavs (probably due to the fact that Germany had to expand to the East, thus inevitably coming into conflict with Slavs). What we should take from this today is that we need to consider all of the Aryan people to be our brethren and sisters - including those who are currently deluded and manipulated to act against us. The Jews managed to get Whites fight each other twice in recent history - we must not ever permit this to happen again.

Strategy-wise, moving forward, we absolutely must retake those institutions and positions of power. This long march through the institutions took the Left about 50 years. However, the more I read and learn about recent history, the more I start to realize how scared those behind it were in the beginning. They took tiny little baby steps in the beginning because they knew they'd be up against a strong and powerful resistance should we ever realize what's going on. And the more they weakened us, the more aggressive they became. They also promoted individualism and degeneracy and used people in favor of these to help advance their cause.

Today, we are looking at a very weak and degenerate society - but we are a group of Aryans warriors who have retained the fighting spirit of our ancestors. And our most powerful strength is our ability of turning at least a couple of those Marxists back into Aryan Warriors. I am very confident that we can do our march through the institutions in less than a decade. Our first priority must be a change of culture - politics will come second - we need to push the narrative that it is not only okay to be White but that it is a good and noble cause to stand up for White interests. Most liberals seem to be individualists who more or less just care about their own self-interest - but they're also very social people who like to have an impact on society. So let them have that - a lasting impact on society - we only need to become "the cool kinds on the block" and they can't really turn their back against us anymore.

Even just getting a small number of those liberals to think oh those White Nationalist, they're really cool guys to hang out with and to learn more about - that'd already be quite a shock for the political establishment. For the ballot box - let's completely abolish this idea of the "magic 51%" as that is not only a false salvation but also very detrimental to our cause. Our goal at the ballot box is not to win elections - at least not in the beginning - but to show our ability to deliver a White Bloc Vote.

Let's pick just a few carefully chosen counties with strong White Nationalist candidates and take those in local elections in a landslide. Instead of winning in a large number of such elections, we should focus on getting the highest possible percentages of the White Vote. Getting some 30% nation wide in the popular vote does nothing to our cause - but let's take a few counties with above 95% of the entire White Population, then possibly take an entire state with a strong 80+% majority. Non-Whites have no problems whatsoever doing that and so should we.

Bonus Points - let's go to a slightly larger county with a university and slightly left-leaning population and focus our entire campaign on just that county alone. We will go from door to door, talk to every single person, listen to their concerns and objectives. Our entire election campaign will be focused on just this single area - an area that our enemies will consider to be theirs for their taking. But we won't go there to win this - we won't even go there to win it in a landslide. No, we will go far beyond of what our enemies might possibly imagine in their worst nightmares - our goal is to take this in a decisive victory and deliver a White Bloc Vote - we will aim for nothing less than 90%.

THIS will write history. It may sound like a crazy dream, but it has been done before. Our ancestors have done it before. Our beloved Führer has done it before. If we can take just one single county with a 90% White Bloc Vote, it will be a devastating shock to the establishment. They will not have a single night of easy rest, fearing the entire state might vote above 60% in favor of a White Nationalist candidate. Such a demonstration of power, of us demonstrating that were are capable of delivering a White Bloc Vote, will also have an effect on those big companies because their executives must realize the imminent threat of possibly losing a large number of their customers.

Apart from the voting process in our election system, we also have a strong influence over those companies with our buying power. No company wants to lose revenue and the driving factor behind all those people getting fired for holding "pro-white" (see my comment on that other thread, I put the word into quotes before for me it includes Cicil Nationalists and many of those people fired were in fact Civil Nationalists) views was their worry of losing buying power from "generation snowflake". This will stop as soon as we demonstrated to those companies that not only we will have the stronger buying power in future, but that there's also a market for alternative companies who hire exclusively White Nationalists.

To conclude, let me emphasize that point again that I made earlier - our strongest weapon is our ability of turning Whites who are currently having anti-white views into Aryan Warriors.

For the Love of Our People.

Hail Victory!

Martin #fundie premierchristianity.com

Martin: David
Of course you have doctrine and they're based on your belief in taking away from one group of people to give to another. You force the Bible into that mould and claim to be a Christian.. That is not Christianity, this is socialism.
Salvation is just the same after Jesus' death and resurrection as it was before. Those events made no difference.

DavidS: I don't have a doctrine as such, I just try to follow Jesus example. Jesus manifesto is set out clearly in Luke 4:
“The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free,
to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”
That's clearly a social justice manifesto. I hate to be the one to tell you this but Jesus wasn't a social conservative who would support 'free market' capitalism based on greed and self-interest. He would support a system that puts the needs of the poor and needy before the wants of the wealthy elite.
The context in which Jesus was speaking does make a difference. Things were different before he fulfilled his mission and different afterwards, otherwise there is no point to his sacrifice.

Martin: David
No, that isn't social justice, it is salvation to those poor in spirit, to those enslaved by their sin, to those spiritually blinded and oppressed.

DavidS: It is to all those as well as the physically and financially poor, the outcast, the refugee, the immigrant, the disabled, the vulnerable, the disabled and those on the fringes.

Martin: No it isn't.

DavidS: It is. Sorry that your evil, sadistic god doesn't see it that way, but that is how the true God who is love, sees it.

Martin: David
The God I worship is just and merciful, what you worship is not a god.

DavidS: So you've denounced Calvinism then?

Martin: Why would I renounce biblical doctrine?

DavidS: Calvinism isn't Biblical.
You said "The God I worship is just and merciful" - the Calvinist God is neither just or merciful, he is a sadistic monster.

Martin: Is a judge a sadistic monster because he judges fairly and applies the law so that the criminal pays the penalty?
You understand neither Calvinism nor the Bible.

DavidS: I understand both. A god who creates billions of lives just to send them to hell is a sadistic monster with no love.

Martin: David
They go to Hell because they choose to, for their sin. Don't blame God for that. As always, you have no understanding of Christianity.

DavidS: According to Calvinism they go to hell because of predestination and because God doesn't want to save them.
I understand Christianity very well, it's about love, mercy and grace. Not judgement and punishment.

Martin: David
They go to Hell because of their sin. Judgement and punishment are at the heart of Christianity. You can't have mercy without them.

DavidS: Mercy triumphs over judgment.
"They go to Hell because of their sin" - that isn't Calvinism. Calvinism says they go to Hell because they're not part of God's hand-picked 'elect', which makes God a sadistic monster.

Martin: David
Yes that is Calvinism. You are an ignorant fool who will not be taught.

Jesse Powell #fundie secularpatriarchy.wordpress.com

Men and Marriage – Real Marriage – By Mark Driscoll
3:52 to 4:21; 10:06 to 11:54; 23:55 to 25:17

“This is what it means when the Bible uses the language of “head,” that we [as men] are responsible in the sight of God for the well being of our wives and children. And so men in this sermon on Men and Marriage you need to know that if your wife struggles or fails to grow in Godliness, if your children struggle or fail to grow in Godliness, it is your responsibility in the sight of God.”

“Your understanding of marriage has to be covenantal, not contractual. And if I had to break it down into its simplest form I would articulate it this way. Contract is about me [the man] negotiating terms that benefit me. It’s selfish. Covenant is about me giving myself to you for your well being. It’s servanthood. Covenant is about your [the woman’s] benefit. Contract is about my [the man’s] benefit. . . .Covenantal thinking says God wants me to become what you need. God wants me to love you as you need. God wants me to serve you as you need. God wants me to invest in you as you need. Covenant is about what is best for you. Contract is about what is best for me. It’s the difference between selfishness and servanthood. And in a covenantal marriage a husband and a wife are in covenant with God through faith in Jesus Christ and they are to be in covenant with one another and the Bible says as Jesus loves and serves the Church so the man as the covenant head is to similarly lovingly lead his wife. So that she flourishes and grows in the grace of God.”

“So men let me tell you what your responsibilities are. And these apply as well to the ladies. I’ll give you four responsibilities. Number one, your first responsibility. Christian! Repent of sin, trust in Jesus, death burial and resurrection. Read your Bible, grow in grace, pray. Be involved with God’s people in the Church. Christian. First things first. Your covenant relationship with God. You’re here today trying to fix your marriage and you don’t know Jesus? That is not your first priority. Your first priority is to get into relationship with Jesus and out of that relationship with Him He will change you so that you can be a better spouse. Your second responsibility is to your spouse. That means husbands, your wife; wives, your husband. Your next priority, your next responsibility is spouse. Then third, parent. If God should bless you with children; loving them, serving them, raising them, investing in them, and growing them. And let me say this, if you invert these you will destroy your children and your marriage. . . .And number four, your fourth responsibility is worker.”

Now onto the substance of Libby Anne’s critique. Libby Anne focuses on the idea of men protecting women from other men and how absurd this idea supposedly is. In reality men protecting women from other men is exactly how a civilized society works. Male headship in marriage and male authority in general is actually about supporting and protecting women globally from all hardships and dangers they may encounter; dangerous men being only one of the dangers patriarchy is meant to protect women from. Still one of the purposes of patriarchy is certainly to protect women from abusive male behaviors.

In how Mark Driscoll sets things up the father is supposed to guide and protect his daughters until the daughter is “handed off” to her husband who then serves to protect his wife. This makes perfect sense. Using the quote from Mark Driscoll that Libby Anne highlights:

“Let’s say for example there’s a daughter, and she’s got a close relationship with her covenant-head, Christian dad. That headship protects her from other boys who want to come along and be her head, tell her what to do, set an identity for her, abuse her, endanger her. It protects her from other young men who would come to take that place of headship in her life. Similarly with a wife, if the husband loves her like Christ loves the church, and he takes responsibility for her, that protects her from bad men, bosses, men who have ill intent or those who are perverted.”

In the way Driscoll is setting things up a young woman will be protected by her father from miscellaneous boyfriends who may be irresponsible or exploitative or even abusive in their behaviors towards women. Similarly a woman will be protected by her husband from men who might be exploitative or abusive towards his wife.

This makes perfect sense because a girl’s father has a strong connection and investment in his daughter and is also older and wiser than his daughter and is more intimidating than his daughter. This is compared to any miscellaneous guy who might be interested in the daughter but has not shown himself to be trustworthy or to be seriously committed to the daughter or to have good prospects to be able to provide for his future family. If a potential boyfriend passes through the various hurdles and shows himself to be the best man and commits to marriage then he has earned the status of the woman’s husband and can then play the role of protector himself. Until then however the man has not earned the right to take on the headship role in relation to the father’s daughter. Same thing regarding the husband protecting his wife from various men who might mean his wife harm or be exploitative towards her. The husband has already shown his high investment and trustworthiness towards the woman; otherwise he would not have been able to marry her in the first place. The husband then has earned the right to serve as the head and protector of his wife and is in the position to protect his wife from the various miscellaneous men who might harm her. The man who has committed to the woman and has shown good character towards the woman outranks all the other men interested in the woman or in lesser relationships with the woman.

Libby Anne is acting as if the concept of men protecting women from other men is an absurdity since if a man is dangerous by virtue of being a man then nothing is gained from an inherently dangerous man “protecting” women from other inherently dangerous men since the so called male “protector” is just as likely to turn around and attack the woman himself once he is given the trusted status of being the woman’s “protector.” The problem with this line of thinking is that some men are more dangerous than other men. The minority sociopath man is more dangerous than the majority socially well adjusted man. The man who has made a high commitment and investment in a woman is less dangerous than the man who only has a casual relationship with a woman. A man who can act as a neutral third party whose primary interest is the well being of the woman, such as a woman’s father, is more trustworthy than a potential suitor who has the obvious self-interest of trying to gain a relationship with the woman. Women are most protected when the most trustworthy and least dangerous categories of men are empowered over the least trustworthy and most dangerous categories of men. The whole point of empowering fathers to protect their daughters from potentially harmful boyfriends and empowering husbands to protect their wives from potentially harmful relationships with other men is so that the men who are the most trustworthy and protective of women’s interests will be in charge.

Conservapedia #fundie conservapedia.com

Mystery:Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist?
Conservative principles are based on reason. So why do non-conservatives still exist? Here are some reasons:
...
* 20%: did not hear about conservative principles until after they made up their mind and, perhaps due to pervasive societal bias, refuse to reconsider
* 10%: genuinely lack of desire to find the truth, and instead desire attention, praise by liberal teachers, getting along by going along, and not standing up to liberal bullies
* 10%: refuse to forgive themselves and let go of their past mistakes and image
* 10%: believe myths created around government programs like the "New Deal" that liberal policies create jobs instead of destroying them and depriving people of liberty through government control.
* 10%: fooled by the demonizing of conservatives and mistakenly feel that conservative benefits are available only to those who are from an intact family or privileged background
* 10%: refuse to rise above their personal temptations, often self-destructive, and hate conservatives who criticize their self-indulgent behavior
* 10%: feel that they deserve to make more money than they do, as in public school teachers and university professors, and refuse to rise above self-interest
* 10%: harbor a grudge against a conservative, typically a parent but sometimes an ex-spouse, and refuse to forgive or rise above the animosity
* 5%: like an anarchist, genuinely want to believe in and propagate destructive ideas
* 5%: are susceptible to marketing and suggestion to an overlarge degree.

Andy Schlafly, Ken DeMyer, Karajou, and others #fundie conservapedia.com

[From "Mystery: Why do non-conservatives exist?"]

Statistical Analysis

(Estimates)

-20%: did not hear about conservative principles until after they made up their mind and, perhaps due to pervasive societal bias, refuse to reconsider

-10%: genuinely lack of desire to find the truth, and instead desire attention, praise by liberal teachers, getting along by going along, and not standing up to liberal bullies

-10%: refuse to forgive themselves and let go of their past mistakes and image

-10%: believe myths created around government programs like the "New Deal" that liberal policies create jobs instead of destroying them and depriving people of liberty through government control.

-10%: fooled by the demonizing of conservatives and mistakenly feel that conservative benefits are available only to those who are from an intact family or privileged background

-10%: refuse to rise above their personal temptations, often self-destructive, and hate conservatives who criticize their self-indulgent behavior

-10%: feel that they deserve to make more money than they do, as in public school teachers and university professors, and refuse to rise above self-interest

-10%: harbor a grudge against a conservative, typically a parent but sometimes an ex-spouse, and refuse to forgive or rise above the animosity

-5%: like an anarchist, genuinely want to believe in and propagate destructive ideas

-5%: are susceptible to marketing and suggestion to an overlarge degree.

What Triggers Reconsideration of Liberal Beliefs?

What triggers reconsideration of liberal beliefs? Here are some estimates:

-25%: raising or teaching children, and realizing how destructive liberal values are to many of them

-15%: a religious conversion followed by taking the Bible to heart

-10%: a loss of a loved one that resulted from accepting or promoting liberal values, as in losing a loved one to crime caused by pornography, drug addiction, gambling, etc.

-10%: a new friendship with someone who is conservative, and realizing how much good flows from the conservative values[1]

-10%: simply by maturing and seeing liberalism's impact around them, and realizing what they were taught as youth was wrong

-5%: a desire to learn the truth, and a dislike for those who mislead

-5%: a genuine divine experience that can not be explained.

-5%: using conservative values to overcome an addiction, and then realizing the benefits of conservative values in many other ways

-5%: taking a truthful course in economics, or learning it in the workforce[2]

-10%: other.

Cultural indoctrination

Brainwashing and deceit:

-They pride themselves on doing well in school or reading the newspaper, can't accept that what they were taught was incorrect or biased.

-Dangerous professors who impose their opinions upon vulnerable youth.

-Television programs posing as comedies, such as South Park, Family Guy, and The Simpsons, which inject liberal beliefs and mock conservative values

-Exposed to incorrect liberal ideas throughout education. Standard American kindergartens up to the fourth grade. Wastes the potential of most children—does not expose them to foreign languages and other learning tasks their minds are obviously and mysteriously suited for. All helping to make them think they need liberal man-made structures that in fact limit their potential in a self-defeating sort of cycle.

-Indoctrination by liberal churches which have a disproportionate focus on biblical passages that appear to support liberal positions, eg. the adulteress story, the disciples holding everything in common, etc.

-A blind obsession to be famous, act and imitate the ways of their famous idols, to absorb their ideals as their own.

-Failure to realize that modern science and modern wealth are the result of historical processes set into motion by God-fearing Christian Conservatives like Blaise Pascal, Robert Boyle, Isaac Newton, and James Maxwell. (When the obvious importance of Christianity to these scientific figures' everyday lives comes up in an academic situation, dangerous professors—liberal historians and liberal scientists—have been known to label it as "some mental disorder".)

-Elementary through high school textbooks having appalling and reprehensible omissions on the basic facts of American life (religion, marriage, politics, and business)[3]

-For decades Universities have discriminated against hiring conservatives, especially social conservatives and religious believers.[4] This has resulted in most college graduates being exposed to liberals prejudiced against conservatives and conservative thought. These graduates become the teachers and other professionals who are unwitting soldiers in liberalism's battle against a Christian Reformed, Roman-Catholic/Anglican/Orthodox, obedient-to-God reality.

No exposure:

-Current fashions in American professional behavior make expressions of Christian faith awkward in the workaday world.

-Increasing zone of publicly funded anti-religious fanaticism (e.g., no school-sponsored prayer)

-Spectacle of entertainment industry (e.g., movies and T.V.) cuts into traditionally popular Christian church social activities

-Most universities and hospitals have forgotten or have been forced to deny (to get various grants and even retirement benefits for their professors) their religious roots. Catholic affiliated institutions remain one of the few exceptions (few or possibly no other body of Christians can make legitimate claims of offering modern Pastoral care as the Roman Catholic church)

Peer Pressure:

-They have liberal friends, and want their approval or acceptance.

-They live in a predominantly liberal state or community and fear rejection from said community.

Systemic bias:

-Some people are inherently irrational, and are thus driven to liberal ideology.

-Their job and salary, such as working for public schools, depends on keeping conservatives out of power.

-Media bias acts to caricature conservatism, making it seem unpalatable, conditioning people to reject its teachings.

-Schools reward politically correct, liberal answers on tests.

-Negative focusing by the media highlights personal flaws of conservatives, driving people to choose to identify with liberals rather than be categorized with those traits.

Liberal characteristics

Poor abstract thinking:

-They have trouble understanding some of the slightly abstract concepts in conservatism, such as "more guns, less crime," and "less taxes, more revenue."

-They are more comfortable discussing simple issues like race and poverty than complex issues like globalism.

-Intellectual myopia - failure to heed the long-term consequences of ideological positions that seem beneficial in the short term.

-Stereotyping: They knew a conservative whom they disliked for some reason, and tar all others with the same brush.

-Ignorance: politics isn't a priority for some people. Without any wish to learn to think for themselves, some liberals don't bother to think through what's right, and just go with what's "cool."

Closed-minded:

-They made up their mind before hearing conservative principles, and will not reconsider their views.

-They have something criticized by conservatives in their personal background, and feel compelled to defend it rather than let it go.

-Slavish adherence to the ideals of liberal parents

Naivety:

-Non-conservatives demonstrate just how prone mankind is to arrogance.

-An admiration for historical figures whom liberals claim were liberals.

-A desire for large government inculcated by personal weakness and reluctance to take personal responsibility.

-Impressionable individuals buying into Bush derangement syndrome, and reacting with emotion rather than reason.

-Reliance on charisma: Charismatic leaders trading on image, rather than experience, can dupe the unsuspecting.

Self-destructive or contrarian behavior:

-Some choose to do what is irrational.
-Use of mind-altering drugs, which encourages one to become a liberal to reconcile the cognitive dissonance, or dulls mental acuity resulting in mindless conformity.

-Sexual experimentation to make up for lack of self-esteem, often with multiple partners, with partners of the same gender, or in public places

-Unthinking rebellion against conservative parents.

-Determined to prove their "independence of mind" by denying authority

Andrew Schlafly #fundie conservapedia.com

Mystery:Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist?

Conservative principles are based on reason. So why do non-conservatives still exist? Here are some reasons:

Statistical Analysis
(Estimates)

20%: did not hear about conservative principles until after they made up their mind and, perhaps due to pervasive societal bias, refuse to reconsider
10%: genuinely lack of desire to find the truth, and instead desire attention, praise by liberal teachers, getting along by going along, and not standing up to liberal bullies
10%: refuse to forgive themselves and let go of their past mistakes and image
10%: believe myths created around government programs like the "New Deal" that liberal policies create jobs instead of destroying them and depriving people of liberty through government control.
10%: fooled by the demonizing of conservatives and mistakenly feel that conservative benefits are available only to those who are from an intact family or privileged background
10%: refuse to rise above their personal temptations, often self-destructive, and hate conservatives who criticize their self-indulgent behavior
10%: feel that they deserve to make more money than they do, as in public school teachers, university professors and scientists, and refuse to rise above self-interest
10%: harbor a grudge against a conservative, typically a parent but sometimes an ex-spouse, and refuse to forgive or rise above the animosity
5%: like an anarchist, genuinely want to believe in and propagate destructive ideas (Due to the tendency of non-conservatives to refuse to admit this even to themselves, this number could be much higher)
5%: are susceptible to marketing and suggestion to an overlarge degree.

What Triggers Reconsideration of Liberal Beliefs?

What triggers reconsideration of liberal beliefs? Here are some estimates:

25%: raising or teaching children, and realizing how destructive liberal values are to many of them
15%: a religious conversion followed by taking the Bible to heart
10%: a loss of a loved one that resulted from accepting or promoting liberal values, as in losing a loved one to crime caused by pornography, drug addiction, gambling, etc.
10%: a new friendship with someone who is conservative, and realizing how much good flows from the conservative values[1]
10%: simply by maturing and seeing liberalism's impact around them, and realizing what they were taught as youth was wrong
5%: a desire to learn the truth, and a dislike for those who mislead
5%: a genuine divine experience that can not be explained.
5%: using conservative values to overcome an addiction, and then realizing the benefits of conservative values in many other ways
5%: taking a truthful course in economics, or learning it in the workforce[2]
10%: other.

Graham H. Seibert, reviewing the book “Race Differences in Ethnocentrism” by Edward Dutton #racist #fundie amazon.com

Stating the obvious, Dutton will be richly vilified by right-thinking people. Rather, left-thinking

Edward Dutton is a phenomenon. I attempt to review most of his books as they come out, and it is almost a full-time job.

His interests cover a wide spectrum, but they all seem to radiate out of evolutionary biology. His key insights are:

• Human populations have evolved to be profoundly different
• Race is a real and useful marker, a product of evolution
• Evolution is ongoing and rapid
• Evolution brought European peoples to the apogee of their intelligence about the time of the Industrial Revolution, and they have been in decline ever since.
• Two causes of the decline are obvious – smart people are not having children, and Europeans are being replaced by less capable immigrants.
• A less obvious cause is the accumulation of deleterious, "spiteful" mutations in the populations, rendering them less fit to reproduce and less intelligent. The unfit no longer die in childhood; society no longer keeps the unfit from reproducing.
• Racial and ethnic groups have different group interests. Ethnocentrism is the topic of this book, though it weaves arguments involving all the above.

Dutton does constant battle against the dominant dogmas of our age, chief among them multiculturalism and political correctness. Multiculturalism specifically denies the group interests of native Europeans. Political correctness has made it difficult to discuss these facts.

Dutton's conclusion is obvious, almost anti-climatic. White Europeans are the least ethnocentric major population on earth. Their denial of their own self-interest amounts to suicide. And yet, through the agency of political correctness, they are constantly vilified as being racist. This is so much the opposite of the truth that it's champions cannot let up on their propaganda. The big lie of white racism must be perpetuated at all costs.

Dutton calls on scientific research from every quarter to support his arguments. However, by their very nature his arguments are difficult to support conclusively, even through the application of statistics. Instead, he relies on corroborative evidence from many different fields pointing to what must be true.

This methodology, necessary as it is, lends itself to the criticism that he has not convincingly proven his arguments. He is arguing merely from preponderance of evidence. Opponents will thus attempt to belittle his work, claiming that he hasn't proven anything, and suggesting that he simply be ignored.

This is wrong, obviously wrong. The preponderance of evidence is quite weighty. An honest rebuttal would seek to marshal a similar number of arguments that go the other way. This, however, is impossible. The people who support multiculturalism and political correctness do so entirely on the strength of moral claims, and rare;u attempt to use science to buttress their positions.

Science is a collaborative effort. Newton allegedly said that if he had seen further, it was because he was "standing on the shoulders of giants." Dutton makes extraordinarily good use of both historical and modern giants. As a top 500 Amazon reviewer with an interest in most of the fields that occupied Dutton, I am in a good position to judge. There are 380 references in his bibliography. I recognize the names of 36 (in comment 1 below) and have reviewed about half of them. I know enough to say that no author who disagreed with Dutton's major points could compile a bibliography half as rich. Dutton is in line with most modern thinking in the realms of genetics, evolutionary psychology, sociobiology, religion, human evolution, paleontology and other related fields.

If the book has a flaw, it is that Dutton works so fast that he does not eliminate all of the typographic errors, small syntax errors, and repetitions. One can say that given the modest readership of books that tweak the nose of the powers that be, he is certainly doing an adequate job. The scholarship of the book is not in any way diminished. A five-star effort.

With a title like "Race Differences in Ethnocentrism" Dutton is just about obliged to name those groups whose ethnocentrism's prejudicial to native European populations (i.e., white people). He does not disappoint. He presents the consensus of evolutionary biologists, (the few brave enough to risk the wrath of the Powers that Be) as to who they are and what motivates them, whether consciously or from deep cultural memory.

Edward Dutton and Michael Woodley of Menie share a YouTube channel called "The Jolly Heretic." These are often discourses by Dutton on topics that interest him, such as why English men are so attractive to foreign women, why Eastern European women are so attractive to foreign men, how to judge people by their looks, and why people get tattoos. At other times they are discussions with fellow authors such as Kevin MacDonald. Although the YouTube medium demands more of your time for a given quantum of input, it is always entertaining. Recommend you look in.

Fading Light #racist stormfront.org

The "Native American" Genocide Myth

Liberals lie constantly without conscience or remorse. They are exposed almost daily in hate-crime hoaxes, racial crime-rate statistical misinformation, and falsified historical accounts. They have been caught in enough major lies, in fact, to fill many large volumes. Just off the top of my head: Michael Brown was not shot in the back nor with his hands up. George Zimmerman is not White and did not inform the dispatcher of the race of Trayvon Martin until asked. The perpetrators of the Oberlin College “hate graffiti” were exposed as false-flagging leftists. Matthew Shepard was not killed by homophobes or because he was gay. The Tuskegee Syphilis study did not infect any Blacks with syphilis, nor refuse to treat any infected Blacks according to the medical knowledge of the time. George Stinney was not convicted of murder in a mistrial. “Jackie” at the University of Virginia was not raped. Blacks are not given longer sentences than Whites are for the same crimes. Homosexuals are not even nearly as likely to remain monogamous as heterosexuals are. Anders Breivik was not a White Nationalist. No one was ever gassed at Dachau. Homosexuality was neither common nor accepted in Ancient Greece. Black people did not “invent” Rock and Roll. Waitress Dayna Morales made up the story about receiving a discriminatory note instead of a tip. Kerri Dunn vandalized her own car to incite hatred against her political opponents. Crystal Magnum lied about being gang-raped in order to frame White men. So did Tawana Brawley. No one shouted the n-word at John Lewis at the political rally in Duluth. Eric Garner was placed in a headlock, not a choke-hold, and the coroner confirmed that no damage was done to his airway.

This is just the tiniest sample of the endless lying from the left. It is a testament to the irrationality, gullibility, and delusional self-interest of the stupider half of humanity that anyone believes anything liberals assert no matter how benign it might sound, to say nothing of their more extreme claims.

And this takes us to the American Indian Genocide Myth: the incessant assertion of the White-hating left that Europeans “committed genocide” against “Native Americans.” The latter term has been placed in quotes because they aren’t native to the Americas. No humans are native to the Americas. “Native American” is yet another evasive, politically correct propaganda label from the same lying libtards who can’t seem to keep their story straight for more than ten seconds at a time.

American Indians speaking English have called themselves Indians for centuries. The American Indian Movement was named by the American Indians (and notice which term they applied to themselves). Of course, there is that small problem of America being a long way from India. For this reason, the scientific term Amerindian was created to remedy it, which is far preferable to the entirely fake and emotion-manipulating term preferred by leftists.

So what is genocide? According to the United Nations (whose definition everyone seems to take as the most official one), it is inflicting upon a group of people conditions calculated to bring about its destruction in whole or in part. In fact, this is only a portion of the UN definition, but it is the most relevant portion.

The UN doesn’t seem to make clear in its definition the difference between a genocide and, for example, a war. Wars often involve races, nationalities, ethnical or religious groups and the killing involved in a war is generally quite deliberate. Presumably the difference is in the intent. If the war is being fought for the purpose of wiping out a group of people, it is genocide. If a bunch of them die as a consequence of a war for some other purpose, it is not. The wars between the Amerindians and European colonists, then, were not genocide. They were, in nearly all cases, started by the incessant treaty-violations of the Amerindians, and ended by the Europeans attempting a new treaty with them instead of simply wiping them out.

Meanwhile, there is no real argument from anyone that most of the Amerindian deaths associated with European colonization resulted from diseases, not war. The left asserts that this was intentional, that centuries before Germ Theory existed, Europeans were using germ-warfare against the Amerindians. The absurdity of this assertion is obvious to any thinking person: The only place Europeans could hope to get diseases to pass to the Amerindians was from each other, but unless they were also committing germ-warfare against themselves, the ready transmission of the same diseases from European to European had to be entirely accidental. So according to leftists, it was unintentional when Europeans spread diseases to each other, but it was “germ-warfare” when the same diseases inevitably spread to the Amerindians (to say nothing of the diseases such as syphilis that they gave to us).

To support this assertion of enormous numbers of intentionally inflicted “germ-warfare casualties,” the left has found . . . (wait for it!) . . . ONE sentence in a private letter written by a European in a fort under siege by Amerindian marauders prior to the existence of the United States. And what does the sentence say? It says that maybe they can get the marauding gang of Amerindians to stop murdering them by making them sick with smallpox transmitted by offering them a stack of blankets that would first have been handled by people who had smallpox.

There are a few massive problems with this “evidence,” however—a few technical issues with this one tiny sentence that constitutes the entirety of liberals’ proof of deliberate germ-warfare against the Amerindians: First, the Amerindians were already getting smallpox and had been for some time, most often via robbing and raping and murdering Whites, some of whom obviously were suffering from the disease. (Otherwise how could anyone at the fort hope to infect a blanket before giving it to an Indian?) In fact, this appears to have been the case for the gang of savages that was attacking the fort in question: They already had it, most likely contracted from the home of a nearby White family that they had murdered and robbed a few days before the siege at the fort began.

Next, there is absolutely no evidence that such a scheme of transmitting smallpox using blankets was ever attempted there or anywhere else. Ward Churchill’s assertion to the contrary turned out to be another lie from a leftist. He made the whole thing up and there was not, in reality, a fort within eight hundred miles of the location at which he claimed a fort’s soldiers had distributed infected blankets.

Last, the transmission via blankets almost certainly would not have worked in any case because smallpox cannot survive very long outside of a host’s body. The blankets would have to be freshly and wetly infected. What kind of an idiot would accept and use a stack of puss-covered blankets? The entire proposal in the sentence in question was a desperate and empty suggestion by an exhausted and distraught person grasping at straws to try to save his people.

The Amerindian Genocide claim also entirely fails to explain the enormous efforts the Europeans went to in order to keep the Amerindians from dying out. Concerned about their falling population, the American government first tried giving the individual Indians land, but they promptly sold it off for liquor, weapons, and the like instead of working it or living on it. Finally, the government set aside large reservations that could not ever be sold to any White person, nor taken away under any circumstances (hence the name “reservations”). It worked, as all Amerindian tribes presently show steadily increasing populations and when including the mixed-race Latinos and others who group with them genetically, they now have populations in the tens or millions in the US and Canada.

In short, all of this means huge sums of money were spent by Whites to (successfully) save the people liberals claim Whites were trying to exterminate. If this was attempted genocide on the part of Europeans, we really suck at it.

Recall that the UN definition of genocide includes the stipulation of “calculated” conditions. This means awareness and willful choice. Clearly Whites recognized that Amerindians were dying out, but chose NOT to maintain the detrimental conditions, and instead went to great lengths to reverse them. Compare this with the ongoing genocide of the White race by anti-Whites, who admit freely that they are aware of our falling population, and vehemently insist on maintaining the conditions resulting in our destruction. By definition, the Amerindian situation was not a genocide. The White situation IS a genocide, and liberals care not at all.

One of the most interesting and pernicious aspects of the Amerindian Genocide myth, however, is in the numbers. A favorite liberal claim is that “greater than 90%” of the Amerindians died in the wake of the arrival of Europeans. How do they know that? The Amerindians were far too primitive, illiterate, and ignorant to have censuses, and trying to search for remains at this point to count them from so long ago would be like trying to do the same for antelope or horses—ridiculous and utterly futile. The leftist solution has simply been to make up numbers—the higher the better—because then it appears that more Amerindians must have died when one looks at the far lower population numbers after Whites started counting them.

Before the age of anti-White liberalism, the best estimates by the academics were very different than they are today. For the territory that is now the United States and Canada, the US Census Bureau estimated in 1894 that the pre-Columbian Amerindian population was half a million. This was a rational estimate considering the primitive, literally stone-age conditions under which they lived throughout most of that region. In 1928, James Mooney, an ethnologist employed by the Smithsonian, estimated a little over twice this number, 1.2 million. Again, this is probably more or less reasonable for their level of technology.

It is worth pausing for a moment to reflect on the fact that liberals consider a debate “won” for their side if they can find a supporting figure from an authority such as an ethnologist working for the Smithsonian or the US Census Bureau. They consider such authority estimates final and unquestionable . . . unless those estimates do not serve their agenda.

The estimates above were good enough by all academic accounts until it became beneficial to the anti-Whites to bump them up in the 1960’s. Then leftist anthropologist Henry Dobyns resolved to work backward to get the answer that he wanted: He decided to assume (without reason or proof) that over 95% of the “native” population died from European diseases (which would be a truly astonishing mortality rate for ANY plague). Using census figures for Amerindians from after the arrival of English colonists, he declared that the pre-Columbian population for the same territory already described must have been in excess of twelve million—ten to twenty times higher than the previous estimates.

This is, of course, a typical example of leftist deception and a wonderful tool of circular reasoning for anti-Whites: They wish to describe the arrival of the Europeans as a devastating calamity for the Amerindians, so they start by assuming that it was, use the assumption to make up some numbers, and then use the numbers to back the assumption whenever the subject comes up thereafter. Liberals ceaselessly cite these numbers as “proof” of the scope of the destruction, never bothering to answer for the source of the numbers they are using.

After all, the numbers come from “experts.” If the population fell from 12 million to 490 thousand by 1900, then that’s a lot of dead people. If, however, the other experts (the ones liberals don’t approve of and whose estimates were around 500 thousand) are correct, then their population barely fell at all. Their argument boils down to declaring that the high estimates are the right ones because White people are evil, and White people are evil because the high estimates are the right ones. Got it?

What liberals can’t avoid, however, is that even in the modern world of politically correct academia, the pre-colonialism Amerindian population estimates are still all over the board. High they undoubtedly remain in nearly every case. After all, who wants to lose their career for being a “racist” by impeding the leftist agenda? And despite this, the upper-end estimates are absurdly, grotesquely, ridiculously inflated. Consider, for example, the estimates for pre-Columbian Central America, which range from 100 thousand at the low end, to about 13.5 million at the high end.

Think about that for a moment: The upper estimate is more than THIRTEEN THOUSAND PERCENT higher than the lower estimate. How does one justify such a thing mathematically? This is like saying that the weight of the average adult female is between 200 and 26000 pounds, or that the cost of a loaf of bread is between five dollars and seven hundred dollars. In math circles, this is referred to as being completely full of crap. In political circles, this is typical leftist “reasoning.”

Liberals depend upon authority arguments because their assertions fall apart immediately when examined logically. When a leftist states a statistic, assume it was simply made up out of thin air (because it probably was). Expend the effort to dig around for the real numbers since your liberal opponents never will: They care not at all about truth, nor about REAL genocides, only about getting their way in everything.

Linda Harvey #fundie #homophobia #transphobia #wingnut missionamerica.com

We’re all figuring out the new normal, yet it’s important to be on guard as the usual suspects try to rip off America while we aren’t looking.

For instance, Samaritan’s Purse is subjected to petty protests from the left about possible “LGBTQ” exclusion from their field hospitals built to take care of virus patients—of any preference or persuasion—in New York City’s Central Park.

So what contributions are America’s homosexual activists making out of the goodness of their hearts? Sacrificing time, talent and treasure to lend a hand to any suffering American, even a Christian, who shows up at their vast array of volunteer clinics?

In a word, zip. Instead, the self-interested Human Rights Campaign is morphing into the latest whining entitlement group. A recent e-blast lamented the marginalized “LGBTQ” community’s limited access to health insurance, the message being that it’s everyone else’s responsibility to provide for these self-disadvantaged perennial victims. Never mind their chosen high-risk lifestyles. The President must be pressured to reopen the wasteful ACA health exchange bureaucracies during the virus emergency.

Watch for the virus relief bills to cover “gay” entitlements as these radicals never let a crisis go to waste, and also, seldom think about anyone but themselves.

While the virus shutdown settles in for a few weeks, parents must diligently protect children now at home for seven additional hours each weekday. Guarding them from cyber danger is essential.

The good news is that drag queens are shut out of libraries for now. The bad news is that some are offering online “entertainment” for kids where perversion is pitched as a light-hearted joke and “LGBTQ” deviance mainstreamed as a normal option.

The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) will hold its annual pro-homosexual/pro-gender-confusion propaganda day, the “Day of Silence,” online for middle and high schoolers this year on April 24. This child corruption organization will also conduct virtual “gay straight alliances” (or “genders and sexualities alliances”) in what they believe is “support” for these terribly confused teens.

Be alert to any connection your middle or high schooler makes on the Internet or in social media to GLSEN or its affiliated activists. They fill young minds and hearts with immoral, ungodly misinformation, are openly hostile to Christian doctrine and seek to propel youth down heartbreaking, sinful roads.

The Human Rights Campaign is in the child endangerment business as well. Its gender confusion indoctrination program for grade schoolers called “Welcoming Schools” is holding a Wednesday online “inclusive” story session, featuring books normalizing gender switching, and families with two moms or two dads. Make sure your kids stay far away from this lollipop deviance.

There is some good news for parents grieving about a teen’s gender identity confusion. Surgeries to amputate healthy body parts (or construct false ones) are on hold for now, because they truly are “non-essential.” The bad news is that off-label prescriptions for puberty blockers and opposite sex hormones can continue.

Cretus clawfinger #racist reddit.com

Agreed. It's already happening with recent alt-right converts who go full "gas the kikes" after overdosing on red-pills in a matter of months. I really get the sense that there will be hell to pay when the normies realize the extent to which anti-white animus has been embedded in the culture, institutions, law, etc. - often by cynical, self-interested tribalists of competing ethnicities under the false veneer of universalist values. Already, the western political establishment would rather have their citizens subject to mass slaughter by terrorists and have their women assaulted by savage rape mobs than act with the common sense self preservation to halt the flow of alien, hostile migrants. Migrants that will eventually dominate politically while biologically replacing and culturally eradicating their own current majorities - all for shallow moral signalling and short-term political gain. This is such an extreme betrayal....not to mention much more aggressively "racist" than the positions held by the vast majority of nationalists, ethnic or otherwise....that the big reveal is a powder keg waiting to blow.
I've followed the alt-right since the inception around 2010/2011, and have managed to keep my head on straight without falling into over-whelming knee-jerk hatred, which can cause the same sorts of reality distortions that leftist ideology can. Knowing the reality of HBD doesn't change how I treat people or judge individuals.
Regardless, basing your world view on a set of easily refutable factual inaccuracies is a shaky footing that forces you to rely on hysterical social shaming and censorship to prevail - witness the left's current tantrums. Their head is too far up their own ass to realize none of this shit is necessary and there's plenty of convincing ways to argue against violent ethnic cleansing campaigns even if sub-saharans are genetically predisposed to lower iq's and higher testosterone levels, or whatever.
Personally, I hope the dam bursts sooner than later. I'd like a moderate Alt-right(ish) movement to prevail so western civilization and the white people who created it are not eradicated from the earth, but also without persecution or hostility towards minority groups. If the pendulum swings back too far, I think the alt-right will either become an impotent freakshow that is nothing more than a speedbump on the road to globalist Brazilification, or if successful, will create something even more terrible than the predicament we're currently in.

lorac #conspiracy 4thwavenow.com

Wow, Brie, you hit it out of the ballpark!

Of course, moms of kids would be concerned, but isn’t it just so shameful that it’s left to them, because the LGBT groups are NOT concerned, and as a matter of fact, seem to want to swell their transgender ranks no matter who they catch in their nets.

There is so much self-interest going on – therapists who don’t seem to want to risk the transgender activists’ wrath, drug companies licking their lips at the prospect of a whole slew of lifetime patients, not the average lesbian or gay, but those lesbian and gay activists who have gotten into bed with the transgender agenda (now they’re the cool kids??), governments and societal organizations that rubber stamp what the loud transgender activists demand – to shut them up? Or perhaps they’re getting donations to go along…?

Civilized countries generally take pride in protecting their youth. What has happened to us that so many are letting our kids be medicated, sterilized, and butchered???

Charles Eisenstein #quack charleseisenstein.org

Because a miracle is (by this definition) impossible from where we stand today, we cannot force the universe to produce one. It is beyond our understanding of cause and effect. We can, however, give the experience of miracle to another person. To the extent we stand in a new story, we all have the power to be miracle-workers. Like Chris, we all have the power to perform acts that violate the old Story of the World.

A miracle is an invitation to a larger reality. Maybe I am more stubborn than most, but it typically takes repeated miracles for me to accept the invitation they hold. The perceptions of separation—for example, linear causality and rational self-interest—are embedded deep within my cells, for I am a product of that age.

At age twenty-one I arrived in Taiwan, uncomfortable in my own culture, in which I felt like an alien, but wedded still to many aspects of its defining stories. True, thanks to my somewhat leftist political upbringing I was cognizant of the bankruptcy of the mythology of progress and economic globalism, but I accepted without question the Scientific Method as the royal road to truth, and believed that science as an institution had arrived at a fairly complete general understanding of how the universe worked. I was, after all, a Yale graduate, trained in mathematics and analytic philosophy. It wasn’t long, though, before my story of the world came under assault. I had experiences with Chinese medicine and qigong that were impervious to my best efforts to explain away. I had a powerful LSD trip that melted what I’d called “reality” into an ocean of mind. I soaked up the Buddhist and Taoist thought that suffused the island, and heard countless stories of ghosts, Taoist shamans, and other weirdness from respectable people that I could dismiss only with a strenuous effort of interpretation. (Maybe they are trying to impress the foreigner. Maybe they are ignorant and superstitious, given to seeing what isn’t there.) I found myself increasingly uncomfortable with the cultural and personal arrogance I had to assume in order to preserve my worldview. To dismiss an entire culture’s perceptions of the world in favor of the dogma of objectivity and reductionism seemed akin to the very same economic and cultural imperialism that I was already aware of. Here was a kind of conceptual imperialism, to see an entire culture through a lens of anthropology or through a narrative of cognitive development that, in both cases, was heavily freighted with the power relations that rule our world.

At the same time, I encountered books that suggested that the Western worldview was crumbling from within. Of particular impact was the work of the Nobel laureate Ilya Prigogine and the physicist David Bohm, two of the twentieth century’s greatest scientists, who upended my understanding of causality and my assumption, which I’d never thought to question on scientific grounds, that the universe is devoid of an inherent order or intelligence. This liberated me from the trap of dualism: to see the phenomena I’d become aware of in Taiwan as the exercise of some separate, nonmaterial realm of spirit; to conclude that science has its domain, and spirituality another. But now I could see that materiality was much more than we had made of it; that potentially, it could include all the phenomena we associate with spirit, and that this could happen, not by reducing, dismissing, or explaining away the “spiritual,” but, on the contrary, only by expanding the material far, far beyond what any scientist was comfortable with.

We are afraid of anything that disrupts our Story of the World, anything that challenges the rules and boundaries of the real. We are afraid of miracles, yet we crave them as well. It is our greatest desire and our greatest fear. When the story we live in is young, the fear is stronger than the desire. A young story has a strong immune system. It can dispose of conflicting data points with ease. I see a dangji (a Taiwanese shaman) in a shaking trance, carrying a burning hot brazier in his bare hands—well, it must not really be as hot as it looks. A taxi driver tells me of the time he picked up an odd woman in a wedding dress and drove her to a street number that didn’t exist, and when he turned to ask her she had disappeared from the cab—well, he was probably drunk that night, or maybe he was trying to impress the gullible foreigner. I sprain my ankle so severely I cannot walk, and am taken to a one-room cement clinic, where the doctor, smoking a cigarette, digs his thumbs into the swollen, inflamed flesh for five minutes of torture, puts some paste on it, wraps it up, and sends me home, and the ankle is completely better the next day—well, it must not have really been that bad, it must not have actually been swollen to double its size like I thought, and in any case it would have gotten better anyway. I visit a qigong master, who taps me on a few spots on my body to “clear my meridians,” and I start pouring sweat within seconds and walk out half an hour later feeling like a million bucks—well, I was probably hot going in there, and didn’t notice that the room was extra hot, and as for the intense tingling I felt when he showed us what projecting qi was, I must have been imagining it. The hundreds of people studying with that man—they must be dupes, bamboozled by his slick talk into believing an impossibility, probably psychologically dependent on the bogus spiritual teachings he peddles. I don’t even need to know what those are or examine whether they are bogus or not—they must be, because otherwise my world falls apart. The same goes for all the claims and lifelong careers of hundreds of thousands of homeopaths, naturopaths, acupuncturists, chiropractors, energy healers, and all the others who practice modalities for which there is “no scientific evidence”—controlled, double-blind studies in peer-reviewed journals. If there were any merit to their ideas, surely the unbiased institutions of science would recognize it by now. Those practitioners have been deceiving themselves, selectively remembering only those cases where the patient got better—and some inevitably will get better even with no treatment at all. They are misguided, self-deceiving, poor observers of reality. Unlike me, and the people I agree with. We are the ones who base our beliefs on evidence and logic.

You can see how robust a Story of the World can be, and how comprehensive. Ultimately, our beliefs about what is and is not scientifically acceptable implicate our trust in existing social structures and authorities. The accusations of naiveté, of mental derangement, of being out of touch with reality, and the emotional energy behind those accusations, stem from a feeling of threat. The threat is real. What is being threatened is the fabric of the world as we have known it. Ultimately, the same fear is behind the mental calisthenics of environmental skeptics or central bankers or anyone else who ignores the increasingly obvious signs that our system is doomed, and that the beliefs we took for granted, the institutions that seemed so permanent, the truisms that seemed so reliable, and the habits of life that seemed so practical are serving us no longer.

Remy Tremblay #fundie eurocanadian.ca

The 60's were a time of change with Pope John XXIII calling the Second Vatican Council in order to modernize the Church. This had a devastating effect on Catholic Quebec. The leftist uprising of May 68 in France and the rise of the New Left in America also contributed to the destruction of the traditionalist way of life of French Canadians. Quebec went through its own Quiet Revolution, a revolution that changed our very nature. Today what is remembered is that most of our institutions (schools, hospitals, social services) were transferred from the Church to the government. If this secularization has had enormous effects on our society, the deepest change brought about by the Quiet Revolution was a redefining of our identity. The term French Canadian, an exclusive ethnic term, was transformed to Quebecois, an inclusive term encompassing anyone living in the territory of Quebec. While pre-60's nationalism was ethnic, religious and linguistic, with the promotion of strong links with outside of Quebec French Canadians, the neo-nationalism of the Quiet Revolution had become linguistic, civic and provincialist.

This neo-nationalism has become the norm nowadays, although ethnic nationalism is still very present, although only implicitly. While the media has adopted political correctness as its credo, some mainstream columnists like Mathieu Bock-Côté and Gilles Proulx openly advocate the defense of our ethnic identity and interests, something that is yet to be seen in the rest of Canada. In Quebec, multiculturalism is universally despised and is seen as a Canadian way to crush our people. The opposition to multiculturalism is so great that the Liberal government and pseudo-intellectuals Charles Taylor and Gérard Bouchard decided to invent our own form of diversity à la québécoise; interculturalism. Needless to say that interculturalism is an even worse model of society than multiculturalism, as it does not even allow our culture to exist as it is, but forces it to change and adapt to new immigrants.

Today a majority of Quebecers openly reject Islam. The announcement of the Liberal government about increased levels of immigration recently caused a public outcry. Pierre-Karl Péladeau, a charismatic leader who is closer to traditional nationalism than neo-nationalism, could awaken Quebec's underlying ethnic nationalism, but it is yet to be seen. Like in the rest of North America and Western Europe, political correctness is still very powerful and makes many adopt positions that clash with their own self-interests.

HamburgerToday2019 #racist #psycho amren.com

(Note: This is in reaction to the still ongoing backlash following the murder of Stephen Lawrence)

RE: A National Festival of Guilt

Given the nature of things in this world, Lawrence was probably killed because he was not a very nice person and his being non-White just added to his irritation. As every fake hate crime should have taught every White by now, the 'crime' is merely an excuse to demonize and degrade Whites and to provide cover for non-Whites attacking Whites in vastly disproportionate numbers.

“Probably killed
because he wasn’t a very nice person?”

Huh?

There Are some a-hole white folks around, see Antifa.

Don't care. White people are my people. If they do wrong against Whites, then the Whites need to deal with them. If Whites do wrong against non-Whites, Whites should defend them and, if necessary, shelter them. This is how every other non-White group works.

There is no 'moral equivalency' between races, because there is no legitimate morality at all between races.

White solidarity is the priority.

Despicable "ethical system."

Why? Because it's not 'universal'? Or because it seeks to restore White interests to the center for White people's decision-making? On what grounds would you call it 'despicable' that we could both agree on? Racial animus from non-Whites and anti-Whites have brought an end to 'rational discourse'. Don't try to sell the White man on 'ethics' when the rest of the races operate on pure racial self-interest. Welcome to the Thunderdome.

It is despicable when other groups do it as well.

Identity should never supersede fairness or decency.

'Should' is a luxury Whites no longer have. We must deal in 'what is'. And 'what is' is ethnic chauvinism wins the day. The most intolerant, the most intractable wins. Liberalism is dead. It committed suicide by subjugating the White Race that created and sustained it. I, for one, am glad she's dead. Now Whites can grow up and stop coddling non-Whites and anti-Whites.

Unknown author #fundie en.minghui.org

I am eleven years old and just graduated from elementary school. My grandma, grandpa, and aunts all practice Falun Dafa. I was fortunate enough to spend this past summer with them, studying the Fa and learning the exercises. During the summer, I got rid of my 7-year addiction to video games. When I was younger, my grandma and grandpa took care of me because my parents were very busy. According to my grandma, I started listening to the lectures of Master Li before I could speak. I also imitated Grandma and Grandpa doing the exercises. When they sent forth righteous thoughts, I played quietly next to them. My grandma said that I was a healthy child and rarely got sick.

I left Grandma and Grandpa when I started elementary school. My parents have always been very busy with their work and often couldn't pick me up from school, so I had a key to our apartment and usually came home from school with no supervision. I started playing video games and became obsessed with them. Because I wanted to play video games, I did not want to do my homework and often slept late. I couldn't focus in school and had frequent headaches. My parents tried many ways to keep me from playing video games, but nothing worked. As time went by, I became irritable, overweight, and did not like any outdoor activity.

A few weeks ago, my aunt show me the following paragraph from “Fa Teaching Given at the New York Fa Conference Celebrating the 25th Anniversary of Dafa's Spreading:”

“Yes, today’s video games are all made by people who are acting at the prompting of aliens. People think that those games were their own creations. But as I said earlier, people don’t know the source of the ideas they have that make them want to create those things. People have no awareness of what’s involved in their thought process at various levels, or how it is that foreign ideas get put into their minds. People are only aware of what happens at the surface level. Those games are harmful and poisonous to humankind, and are leading people to lose their humanity.”

I was shocked, and that made me determined to give up video games. I picked up my phone and started to delete the games on it. Suddenly, the screen blacked out. I asked Master for help and took out the battery. I then put the battery back in and turned it on. The games were deleted. A few days later, I was using an iPad and saw the video games on it. I couldn't help starting to play again. My aunt reminded me to strengthen my righteous thoughts and break away from video games. She said that our precious bodies should not be controlled by bad things. I immediately deleted all the games on the iPad.

Through studying the Fa, I started to understand that human society is like a mud puddle. Everyday people are attached to fame and self-interest and find society enjoyable, but it is actually very dangerous. Master has provided us with a ladder that can lead us to heaven. If we assimilate to Truthfulness-Compassion-Forbearance through cultivation, we can climb that ladder and return to our true homes.

Anonymous #fundie blogger.com

Don't give up. The Feminists and the Conservadads (portmanteau of "conservative" and "dad") are not even two sides of the same coin, but really the same side of the same coin. They are indistinguishable in all but name when it comes to the topic of "child" (that is, older than 11) sexuality. Feminists are self-interested manipulators of the male protectionist instinct, and their Conservadad counterparts are males whose protectionist instinct, the instinct to protect "women and children", has been turned against the healthy (hetero-)sexuality of young people, that is: against the naturally-occurring sexual attractions, and the sexual relations ensuing from those naturally-occurring sexual attractions, between any males regardless of age and any females who are "young", the usual case being that the male is "older" (16-22) and the female is "younger" (12-15).

The issue is, frankly, one of imagination. The Conservadads have a constrained imaginative ability, so they can't even imagine that it's possible for a 12 year old "girl" to sexually desire a 18 year old male, and to relish in every millisecond of a healthy sexual relationship with such a man. They think that forcing young people to be sexually frustrated and to masturbate in loneliness for years is better than to allow them to explore their sexual appetite and be empowered by it. That's because they think sex itself is inherently "sinful" and unhealthy. These people are clueless and have the arrogant audacity to claim the "moral high ground" even as their anti-natural ideology brings nothing but pain and frustration to innocent people.

Normies are sheeple.

Zabilgy #conspiracy abovetopsecret.com

Hemp is one of the most versatile plants in the world; hemp fibres can be used for paper and textiles, the seeds are a good source of unsaturated oil, which can be used for cooking and as fuel. Hemp can even be used to make plastics. Hemp requires few pesticides and leaves the soil clean for other plants after cultivation. With all these applications one would think it would be hyped as the 'Emperor of crops'. Yet it has been buried in the annals of history for reasons that would not look out of place in a Le Carrier novel.

A little History

Since the latter half of 1998 the awareness of hemp has been rising. Interest in hemp first came to light in the west in the 1930's when hemp was actually described as a 'billion dollar crop' and a bright future was predicted. However it was not to pass. What follows is story that is fascinating, full of skull-duggery, conspiracy, media manipulation any spin-doctor would be proud of, and ultimately the triumph of self-interest. The biggest reason for this burial was that in the 1930's Dupont obtained patents from making nylon from coal, paper from trees and plastic from oil, and didn't want to see hemp as a potential competitor. Remarkably but not surprisingly, the companies chief financial backer at the time, Andre Mellon, owned large swathes of timber land and oil. Mellon appointed his nephew-in-law Harry Anslinger to the Federal Bureau of Narcotics while other Dupont backers such as the Hearst newspaper group began to influence public opinion towards the perceived evils of marijuana. This also saw the rise of the pulp fiction novels with wonderfully lurid covers and titles such as 'I was a slave to marijuana' and films such as Reefer Madness. Basically this propaganda strategy worked and in 1937 Congress outlawed hemp. The actual science was buried, and the fact industrial hemp has such a low THC content that you would be better off smoking bananas was quietly hushed in order to confuse the public. Not only did the probation of hemp protect Du Pont but also many other corporations such as Dow and Monsanto - all of whom had vested interests in ensuring hemp industries didn't see the light of day. Another twist in the tail and 'would you believe it' factoid: car manufacturer Henry Ford grew hemp on his estate to experiment with methanol production and both he and Rudolph Diesel (diesel inventor) predicted by the end of the millennium cars would be running on hemp. Hemp production briefly re-emerged in 1942 when the federal government encouraged American farmers to grow it for the war effort.

For more info: www.ethicalmatters.co.uk...

Basically marijuana being made illegal had nothing to do with smoking it! It had everything to do with big business, DUPONT and MONSANTO and DOW, wanting to makes billions of dollars on clothing made of crappy plastic fibers = POLYESTER as well as other products that hemp would have kept them from making as much money on! (Emphasis in original)

Fist In the Face Of Misandry #sexist promalecollective.wordpress.com

{Excerpts from the „Pro-Male manifesto“}

Feminism is a hate movement. It has always been such and there is no such thing as a valid feminism. Do not make excuses for that hate movement. All three waves of feminism are based on misandry and disinformation. There has to be zero compromise with that movement. No one expects Jews to compromise with the Nazis and no one expects black people to play nice with the KKK.

You can’t be pro-male and married. It is that simple. MGTOW tackles the controversies surrounding marriage from the narrow point-of-view of the man’s self-interest, but when a man marries, he is maintaining an anti-male institution. This action sells other men out and in turn harms the entire male collective, just for a bit of female validation. Furthermore, singles end up paying for the tax breaks that benefit married couples and fund the social services used by housewives.

Trifecta!!!

...but what will we call them after SSTDT opens?

Nya Nya Jo #fundie edendecoded.com

I frankly get tired of uninformed people attempting to blame the disappearance of the traditional Black family on the man. Men didn't leave the home - women instead opted to have homes without men. Black women opted to side with Democrats and their liberal policies so they could fund a lifestyle without Black men - a lifestyle of whoredom.

The problem with Black America is NOT fatherlessness. The problem is really the acceptance of 'whore culture.'

YOU MAY BE ASKING, what is whore culture? Whore culture is where women have premarital sex resulting in the birth of unwanted children. In other words: bastard children.

By definition a bastard is a "person born of parents not married to each other." Other terms for bastard include love-child, or someone born out of wedlock. So when I use the term 'bastard' here, I'm not doing it to be mean or disrespectful.

I'm driving home a point that really needs to be made, heard and deeply understood if we're ever going to fix the problems that currently plague the so-called black community. Because most black children, the tune of at least 70% or more according to the most recent stats, are out of wedlock births. Which makes them bastards.

And typically, these children witness their mothers participating in whoredom. For instance: the mother will have her boyfriend staying over, and while she thinks her child is asleep, the child can hear the sounds of their mother and her boyfriend having sex. Which often leads to the child venturing into future lifestyle of whoredom: girls becoming whores, and sons becoming whoremongers.

A mother like this is NOT a good mother, despite her protest to the contrary; but a whoreish mother. How can a 'good' mother put her sexual desires before the mental, spiritual and emotional welfare of her own innocent child?

And why should a man be expected to cohabitate with a woman that wants to live the lifestyle of a whore? Of course no man in his rightful mind would sign up to marry a whorish woman; nor to live in a whore house!

Now before you go getting all bent out of shape over my use of the word whore, the textbook definition of a whore is a prostitute. And a prostitute is defined as (typically) a woman who engages in sexual activity for payment. In other words: any woman who grants sex in return for any kind of gratuitous favor, as in getting bills paid, rent, car notes, hair and nails done etc., technically qualifies as a whore.

And as a result of all this whorish activity within the black community, the number of single-mother homes skyrocketed drastically. (cited US census, Center for Disease Control Statistics, and National Vital Statistics):

•From 1930 to 1960 approximately 30% of the births were out-of-wedlock (illegitimate)
•In 1965 illegitimate births rose to approximately 50%
•From 2000 to 2015 the illegitimate birth rate hovered around 70 to 72%

To put things in perspective, a 70% illegitimate birth rate is approximately one million out-of-wedlock births a year! Let that sink in for a moment! Over a five year span, black women have given birth to roughly five million bastard babies. My God: what have we done to our community!

Everyone keeps asking 'What happened to the Black Family?' The question is NOT what happened to the Black family, the question should be WHO happened to the Black family. And statistics and history show it's the modern black woman that destroyed the traditional family unit.

I POSIT A THEORY HERE, that black women were seduced into this role of single-motherhood. She didn't just think this on her own. In her own self-interest, she made a deal with liberal policies and laws put forth by Washington Democrats that promised generous benefits to any woman willing to break with the tradition of marriage as the foundation for building a family on.

These liberal policies tempted the following generations of black women to have sex without worry of pregnancy being an issue; because whether the guy responsible for the pregnancy chose to stick around or not, the government would step in to help ease the pain and stress that came with making such a poor choice. Such policies weren't designed to strengthen black families: they were anti-god from the beginning with the end result of destroying black families, as women proudly bragged about not needing a man, and being able to be both the mother and father to their children.

Basically, black women made a deal with the Devil. She sold her womanhood for hoodrat status, government trinkets, empty prestige and damnable liberal illusions of being able to create and raise a family without a husband.

Black women ultimately married their destiny to liberal policies and beliefs. It was their acceptance of anti-god politics that created broken families and bastard children.

True Catholic #fundie answers.yahoo.com

I have noticed ever since these atheists, feminisists, communists, gay activistis, etc, basically general liberal scum, started going wild, the world has declinned in morality. Literally there is no morals in the world now, at least not in the west. Russia and Eastern Europe hold onto some of the old ways, but the USA for example is declining. The universities are indoctrination centres to make good white Catholics turn away from our Lord and because raging teenage punkers with no respect or values. I've seen lots of good white Christians dating coloureds, its' SICK! I can't stand this anymore, I am so disgusting and repulsed with how communism and liberalism has worn down the fabric of this nation into nothing. We can thank liberals for multicultural hell, no Christianity being respected, generally the new world order coming into power, etc. You can thank all these stupid self-interest groups for this, and like Jesus predicted, the end times are near. So I am apalled at how the western world has lost its moral fabric in the last 30 or so years, and how bad the world is. Thanks alot atheists, homosexuals, and other degenerates, now USA is becomming a 3rd world country.

Evola Yockey, Anarchyst #conspiracy #racist 4racism.org

Evola Yockey:
You've been gaslit as to jewish IQ. It ain't what you claim it is.

Also, "Nobel Prizes" essentially mean nothing when 50 percent of the Nobel Committee are fellow jews, doing what jews do, which is nepotism.

Anarchyst:
The one reason that makes jews so successful is that they formulate and enact laws (civil-rights for some) that deny us whites the right to look after our own self-interest while they flout the laws that are imposed on the rest of us. THAT, my friends is a reason for their"success".

A good example of jewish flouting of "civil-rights" laws is the jewish community of Kiryas Joel, New York, among others. If you are not jewish, you cannot buy property there, nor can you send yournon-jewish children to the (jews-only) “public” schools.

Not only that, but most of the jews who occupy Kiryas Joel and other “jews only” communities also take advantage of “social services” and “welfare” programs out of proportion to their numbers. Almost every jew is running some kind of “scam” on the American “social welfare system”.

You see, "multiculturalism and diversity for thee, but not for me" is the jewish mantra and is the primary way that they destroy cultures and civilizations. Their lack of morality figures heavily
into their success. Jews think nothing of screwing over a "goy"; it is just "normal business" for them...

Jews are the only group that lacks a moral component. Jews are very amoral, think nothing of screwing a "goy" out of money, possessions, or even reputation or life. You see, the jewish talmud elevates the jew above all others, "goyim" being "livestock with souls, created only to serve the jew".

This amorality is a critical component in jewish life and is partially responsible for jewish successes. When one does not possess a moral compass that defines and separates "right from wrong" THAT in itself gives the jew greater latitude to "get what he wants" as there are "no limits" on what a jew may do to gain the advantage in just about any situation. The lack of a moral component within jewish life is a major reason for jewish supremacy in civilized societies.

It’s not “smarts” or “IQ” that gives jews an advantage over gentile whites, but is their rabid insistence on cultural and social cohesiveness, unbridled insularity and nepotism (but only for themselves) that gives them an “advantage”.

This same cultural and social cohesiveness that is prized so highly by jewish interests is denied to gentile whites. Jews, to a man will fight to deny this same cultural and social cohesiveness to gentile whites that they themselves enjoy as it is a major part of the jewish purpose–the destruction of gentile white culture, which IS superior to any jewish cultural or social society. If jews did not possess this power, they would most likely be rag merchants, liquor merchants, or furniture merchants–nothing more.

As I have previously stated, jewish success is based on cultural and social cohesiveness and insularity–NOT “smarts” or “IQ”. Once enough jews get into a position of power in the work world or education systems, they will hire and promote their own, even bypassing more qualified gentile white candidates.

Jews have latched on to cultural cohesiveness and nepotism, as it serves their purpose exceedingly well.

At the same time, jews pushed the concept of racial “equality”, (but only for gentile whites), backing it up with “civil-rights” and “equal accommodation” laws which are enforced by governments–but only against whites. These “civil-rights” laws are used as a “battering ram” against gentile whites to diffuse and fragment any semblance of gentile white solidarity and cohesiveness that may arise. Those of us whites who came of age during the so-called "civil-rights" era had a saying" "Behind every negro, there is a jew", as most of the civil-rights "handlers" were New York-based leftist communist jews.

A great reckoning dealing with the jews is coming. As gentile whites become more marginalized, the accusation of being tagged as “racist” or a “holocaust denier” is rapidly losing its “sting”.

Increasingly, jews are more wary of being “called out” and recognized as “jews”. One can call a jew a shyster, shylock, bankster, criminal or ne-er-do-well, and it will roll off his back like water off a duck, BUT call a jew a “jew”, and he will recoil in horror, having been “found out”.

Jedi #fundie christianforums.com

I am not saying that every atheist feels obligated to go kill people. In fact, such an obligation (if not for the variable of self-interest) would make no sense. I’m saying that, to an atheist, there’s nothing wrong with killing people (since morality is nothing but subjective opinion). An atheist, if true to his title, sees nothing wrong with events like Columbine, September 11, the Oklahoma City bombing, etc.

Brian Niemeier #wingnut #conspiracy #mammon brianniemeier.com

It is equally ironic and predictable that Liberal democracy would end in an orgy of tyranny to make a decadent French nobleman balk. Democracy thought to solve the problem of tyranny by letting the people replace their leaders, but our leaders circumvented that check by replacing the people.

It's no coincidence that nobody pays more lip service to democracy than the Leftist Death Cult. Having just completed a century-long project designed to insulate them from the consequences of their depredations, the Left are feeling their oats and accordingly embarking upon a totalitarian spree once reserved for Soviet puppet states.

After spending the past few decades constantly testing boundaries like sociopathic toddlers, the Death Cultists are now confident that they will face no serious pushback against their insane edicts and will suffer no punishments for their enormities.

You can tell because they're not even bothering to hide the election tampering, treason, and human sacrifice anymore. The Epstein debacle was the final proof. You had an international scumbag who furnished child sex slaves to other international scumbags and lived like a pharaoh until he slipped up one time too many. Then his former benefactors pushed a button on him with matching sloppiness.

Time was, the ruling party would put some effort into coming up with a cock and bull story to mollify the NPCs. Now, instead of lone gunmen and magic bullets, we get tacit admissions that foul play is afoot but zero follow up action from law enforcement. That's why the Cult didn't offer up the usual ablative meat shields over the coup against Trump. No need to sacrifice scapegoats when there are zero consequences for ignoring the cries for justice.

This casual wickedness has even trickled down from the thrones in Washington to the Cult's Hollywood priesthood. In just two years, Kevin Spacey has gone from facing jail time for alleged shenanigans with an underage boy to flaunting his case's dismissal in a bizarre Christmas video.

More than bizarre, Spacey's message took on a sinister new subtext when one of his accusers died in an apparent suicide the day after it was posted.

Is it a coincidence that Spacey's accuser died one day after the disgraced star invited viewers to kill detractors with kindness? Possibly, but if so, it's the most uncanny example of prophetic TV since Quantum Leap called the 96 Super Bowl.

Now consider that Spacey has close ties to the Clintons, including at least one trip with Bill aboard Epstein's Lolita Express.

It's hard not to see one epic humiliation ritual behind the whole sordid affair. And the meaning of that ritual is clear: "We're in charge. Our control is total. We can do anything we want, and we can lie, cheat, and kill with zero repercussions, so think twice before getting in our way."

Our rulers have moved beyond simple corruption and into the chilling realm of supervillainy. Voting won't stop them any more than it would stop Lex Luthor or Keyeser Söze. Democracy is based on negotiation, and there's no negotiating with people who are in a position to dictate terms.

It's worth remembering, though, that the ruling classes of old adopted noblesse oblige out of enlightened self-interest as much as Christian charity. Our current rulers have neither Christian virtue nor the practical sense to give the mob a few token concessions. If history is any guide, they may learn to their sorrow that their predecessors practiced a degree of restraint for their own protection.

For a glimpse at a future conflict against an aloof, tyrannical state, check out my military thriller series Combat Frame XSeed.

Jeffrey23a & SophisticatedBean #sexist reddit.com

Re: The hypothesis stating that females with borderline personality disorder represent an extreme form of female-typical behavior has been informally suggested following Baron-Cohen’s Extreme Male Brain theory of autism.

(Jeffrey23a)

So typicall female behavior is falling easily in love and creating strong emotional connections. And when they get angry they are second to the devil.

Women only fall in love easily with attractive men. They almost never fall in love with low-status, unattractive men.

Women's biological imperative is to extract as many resources as possible from men for themselves and for their offspring. That is why women are so materialistic, selfish, and manipulative. Women's love tends to be conditional, pragmatical and self-interested. Men's love tends to be unconditional and sacrificial. Women often divorce or break-up with their partners as soon as a better option presents itself. If BPD is an extreme form of female-typical behavior, one would expect these tendencies to be even more pronounced in women diagnosed with the disorder.

(SophisticatedBean)

Yeah, Baron-Cohen's E-S theory is bluepilled.

BPD and especially histrionic disorder are overwhelmingly female disorders, but not because they maximize empathy. Women are actually not much more empathetic, if at all (think intrasexual competition and how they opportunistically switch mates). All their emotions are simply more extroverted in a childish manner. Their caring obsession with children is completely misleading. The extremes of both sexes have low empathy which makes sense in a world of limited resources where species are selected to selfishly maximize their reproductive success. It's different kinds of psychopathy though: Gossipy/hysterical intrasexual competition etc. vs ruthless dominance.

Systemizing is better, but this also does not delineate casual pondering ("omg I love science!!") from deep status-driven thought.

Michael Egnor #fundie sandwalk.blogspot.com

Cutting science funding to the bone is a wonderful thing: most of the stuff that makes it into journals is crap, data massaging is ubiquitous, peer review is a joke, and the science profession has become just another bunch of corrupt self-interested government contractors. Climate science is a crime syndicate, and evolutionary biology is an atheist priesthood.

You [explicative redacted] have far too high an opinion of yourselves. Most of you would struggle to make it in the drive-in window at McDonalds. You have few marketable skills.

Erinmore #racist bnp.org.uk

We mustn’t forget, of course, non-whites are not British, English, Irish, Scots and/or Welsh. They are non-white alien occupiers of our ancestral homelands.

Regardless of what generation they represent born on British soil, all non-whites who break our laws should be subject along with their relatives, to deportation except specifically those found guilty of raping, maiming and/or murdering indigenous Britons, in which case, their punishment should automatically be the death penalty.

Also, they have no rights to self-interest organisations including political and religious.

They should not be allowed to own land or property. While they remain domicile in our ancestral homelands, renting should be the only option open to them. After all, this is how they conduct affairs in relation to aliens back in their own non-white homelands.

Andy Schlafly #fundie conservapedia.com

The invisible hand of marriage is unseen force of productivity that results from the marriage of a man and woman.[1]

The invisible hand of marriage is more powerful and influential than the "invisible hand" identified by Adam Smith in economics. Indeed, the source of productivity from Smith's invisible hand has been erroneously attributed to purely economic considerations, without properly factoring in the productive force of marriage. Self-interest and greed are not the primary driving forces of the invisible hand, but marriage is.

Key elements of the invisible hand of marriage include:

* the powerful incentive to work for the benefit of someone else who needs your efforts, such as a spouse or child
* the motivation to work for a future that will likely extend beyond one's own life
* the checks and balances against unproductive activity, anxiety, depression and addiction, from the very different perspectives of a man and a woman
* the insights and wisdom that result from complementary outlooks by a man and woman in marriage
* the pushing and prodding, analogous to what a supervisor, coach or sergeant does, that encourages and compels people in marriage to achieve their best
* a division of labor that enables each spouse to work on what he or she does best

(add to or improve this list)

Same-sex marriage

There is no invisible hand of marriage if the spouses have the same gender. Virtually none of the above elements exist in same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriage is a recipe for unproductive activity, anxiety, depression and addition, with the enormously beneficial checks and balances provided by traditional marriage.

References

1. ? This concept was first discovered and developed on Conservapedia. When this entry was generated here, a Google search on "invisible hand of marriage" did not find a single reference on the internet: "No results found for 'invisible hand of marriage.'"

Unknown author #fundie en.minghui.org

I am 54-years-old. I began practicing Falun Dafa in January 1998. Within a few days of taking up the practice, my chronic liver disease and herniated lumbar disc condition were completely healed.

On the night of 15 May 2011, I was rushing home from work when the rear tire burst and threw my motorbike out of control. My body forcefully collided with a tree growing beside the road.

Though I managed to remain conscious soon after the collision, the impact left me partially blind and paralyzed. A passerby helped me to sit up and offered to contact my family. I managed to get my phone from my pocket and pointed out my wife's number before losing consciousness. The passerby managed to contact my wife, who rushed to the accident site and took me to the county hospital for emergency treatment. I held firm to my belief that Master would save me. Although I was barely conscious, I whispered repeatedly, “Master save me...” The attending doctors were puzzled and asked my family for clarification. Members of my family explained, “This man practices Falun Gong.” One doctor replied, “He will need all the luck he can get.”

My precipitously low blood pressure and weak respiration rate required an emergency operation. During the surgery, I felt my soul float out from my body before being ushered by two beings to the site of an ancient auditorium. A large table stood in the middle of the auditorium. Behind the table was a man dressed in the robes of ancient Chinese officials. Guards stood on either side, holding various Chinese weapons. The official standing behind the table asked me, “What good deeds have you performed in this lifetime and what virtues have you accumulated?” I solemnly replied, “I have no notable good or bad deeds, nor have I accumulated any virtue. I merely cultivated the Buddha Fa under Master Li Hongzhi."

On hearing my reply, the official instantly stood up and said, “Very good. Under such circumstances you are still able to recall and respect your Master. Continue to keep this in mind. Your life does not fall under my jurisdiction. Return to where you came from.” After that, he waved a hand at me and I felt an invisible force pushing me away. For an instant, I experienced a falling sensation before regaining consciousness when I felt the doctor patting my face and shouting my name.

Doctors found that the accident had ruptured my spleen, fractured my left ribcage in nine places, seriously bruised and lacerated many of my internal organs, and caused severe hemorrhage in my chest cavity which required removal of at least four liters of blood. Hospital surgeons spent six hours trying to save my life. Eventually, they were forced to inform my family that any hope for survival was just too small. Doctors then recommended I be moved to the larger provincial hospital for further emergency treatment, but also warned, “He could pass away while in the midst of transportation.”

The ambulance successfully transported me to the provincial hospital. However emergency doctors initially declined to admit me, as they deemed my condition hopeless. The hospital later reluctantly allowed my admission after a relative working at the hospital spoke up on my behalf. While doctors were trying to hook me up to a better ventilator, my heart suddenly stopped and my soul floated away from my body. I saw the attending doctor performing chest compressions on my body before coming to the sudden realization that I could not spend too much time away from my physical self, or else my death would become permanent. I knew I could not leave yet, as I had not fulfilled my vow to assist Master in rectifying the Fa and saving sentient beings. With this thought, I returned to my physical body and woke to the sensation of a person slapping my face while calling my name. I managed to move my hand slightly to signal my acknowledgement.

One of the attending doctors later told me, “Your pupils were unfocused, your breathing and heart rate had completely stopped. We were preparing to push your dead body out of the operating theater when you suddenly sprang to life. It was really amazing. You should treasure this unexpected gift!” I spent the next six days in a state of partial consciousness and only regained full consciousness on the afternoon of the sixth day. Throughout, my wife and fellow practitioners continued to send forth righteous thoughts.

I underwent a medical examination during my eighth day in the intensive care unit. In the midst of the exam, I suddenly felt an overwhelming sense of pain and severe breathlessness. My wife softly reminded me to maintain my righteous thoughts. I asked Master for help, silently reciting Lunyu and poems from Hong Yin. The examination was successfully completed and doctors further reported that the condition of my kidneys, heart, liver and lungs had greatly improved. I was transferred to an ordinary hospital ward after twelve days in the ICU. Every day, my wife would play recordings of Master's lectures. In between, I would memorize the Fa.

Initially, my recovery progressed swiftly. However, my show off mentality surfaced and I forced myself out of bed too early. As a result of overexertion, my surgical wound reopened and became infected. I came down with a high fever and forgot to hold myself to the standards of a Dafa practitioner. My pride and competitive attachments resurfaced and I fought with my wife over a minor matter. My life was in danger of being claimed by the old forces, but I refused to recognize my faults.

While I was in a state of semi-consciousness, merciful Master opened my sealed memories. I saw many scenes, showing my predestined relationship with Master and the detrimental arrangements made for me by the old forces. I would wake up in tears after each scene, suffering from a severe sense of guilt. Despite having achieved the status of a Dafa practitioner, I had been unforgivably lax in my cultivation practice. My experience bolstered my determination to reinforce my righteous thoughts, search inwards and work on memorizing the Fa.

As soon as my fever was gone, I requested to be released from the hospital. My doctors, however, disagreed, as the drainage tube inserted into the pleura surrounding my lungs indicated that my body was still producing large amounts of discharge. On hearing their verdict, I intensified my efforts in sending forth righteous thoughts, clearing away the evil interference from the other dimensions. I then resumed my demands to be discharged from hospital. Doctors performed a scan that afternoon and discovered that the pleural fluid had disappeared. They removed the drainage tube and prepared to send me home.

When the throat specialist arrived to close up my tracheostomy incision, my relatives took the opportunity to ask if I would regain my voice. The specialist replied, “It is unlikely.” My wife suggested I try to read the Fa aloud during my study sessions. One afternoon on the third day, while reading Zhuan Falun, the phone rang. Automatically, I picked up the phone and greeted the caller. The caller was surprised, “You are able to speak?” I replied, “It’s all thanks to my Master.” My voice soon recovered and returned to normal.

At one point during my recovery, my stomach started swelling and I was unable to eat, drink or even excrete for five days. Pushed to the brink, I was unable to sustain my cultivation state and even entertained thoughts of suicide. My wife and a fellow practitioner tried to offer support by reading the Fa at my bedside, sending forth righteous thoughts and offering counsel. However I was so tortured by the pain that I was unable to look inwards. I rudely rejected their advice and tried to expel the fellow practitioner from my home. Luckily, the practitioner knew that I was under the control of the old forces and refused to give up. He sacrificed a number of days and nights in order to accompany me in studying the Fa and sending forth righteous thoughts.

With his determined encouragement, I managed to resume my cultivation state by searching inwards and correcting my failings. Though I managed to overcome this difficult tribulation, my physical condition worsened and my weight dropped to 80 pounds. Every movement and step became exhausting. Around this time, I experienced a dream where a voice said, “Give up and resume the life of an ordinary person. You cannot win this fight.” I immediately rebutted, “I follow the practice taught by Master Li. Master taught us to adhere to the principles of Truthfulness-Compassion-Forbearance. Practitioners have no enemies and we will not get involved in a fight with anyone.”

I continued to search inwards, study the Fa with my wife and send forth righteous thoughts. My health began to improve, but some residual swelling remained in my chest and abdomen. One night, I dreamed I was having an argument with another person over self-interests. In the midst of our argument, a merciful voice resounded from above, “You still love to argue!” The words hit me deeply and I woke up crying tears of regret. This incident spurred my determination to unconditionally examine myself. I discovered many failings, including selfishness, pride, jealousy, combativeness, anger and hate.

My attachments spurred my efforts in studying the Fa and sending forth righteous thoughts to clear the evil factors and interference. My health began to improve and the pain lessened. One morning, while practicing the fifth set of exercises, I saw a yellow-green gourd float down from the sky. The gourd stopped close to my left arm and prepared to enter my body. Subconsciously, I realized that the gourd was a bad item and sent forth righteous thoughts. The gourd instantly split apart, releasing the dirty blood and pus contained within. From that day on, I was able to eat and drink normally. The swelling in my chest and abdomen receded and I made a full recovery. I was able to help with the autumn harvest in our family fields and held down a temporary job during the winter months. My strength has returned and I can easily lift over 300 pounds or take a brisk walk over a long distance with no effort.

From this tribulation, I learned to treat cultivation practice seriously and cherish my luck in becoming a Dafa cultivator. Words cannot describe the thanks I have for Master.

conservativekids.net #fundie conservativekids.net

Since you are on this website, you probably have a general knowledge of the two competing political camps in America, liberalism and conservatism. Surprisingly, a lot of people who live their lives in a conservative way vote for liberals, which is against their self-interest. To understand why this happens, let's look at the basic idea behind liberalism.
Liberals core principle or ideology is that the government should do for people what they cant do for themselves. This gives the government more power at the expense of the freedom of the people.
For instance, liberals don't think that people in general are capable of taking care of their own health. So they set up huge government agencies like Medicaire, Medicaid, and are even trying to nationalize health insurance. Of course, it takes a lot of tax money to pay for these liberal programs.
Liberals don't think people are capable of providing their own meals or paying their bills, so they set up Welfare programs and hand out food stamps and WIC (more tax money).
Liberals don't think people are capable of planning their own retirement, so they set up Social Security and block any efforts to change that broken system (more tax money).
Liberals don't think people are capable of managing their own education, so they set up public schools which happen to be run by more liberals (more tax money).
Liberals don't think people are capable of choosing their own lifestyle, so they pass laws that tell people what they can and can't eat and drink, where they can live, what they can listen to on the radio or watch on tv, what kinds of cars they will drive and how parents should raise their kids (less personal freedom).
Basically, liberalism is the belief that the average person is too dumb to take care of themself, so they need a big government to take care of them. Liberals believe that they are the smartest and most caring people, so they should run the government (more tax money) that takes care of the poor dumb people .
People vote for liberals because the idea of helping their neighbor through liberal social programs sounds good. But instead of helping them, these government programs create huge groups of people who will not be responsible for their own well-being.
Today, more than half of the people in the United States receive some kind of money from the government, and they are supported by the tax dollars of the minority. Financially, this cannot work in the long run.
Liberalism is socialism and marxism. It fails every time it is tried.

ThomasER916 #racist dailybruin.com

The real problem is whites need to stop thinking there's a "human race" and they're the source of all problems in the world. No white should ever support non-white, non-Christian immigration - ever. The goal of the Left and their immigration policies are to make whites a hated, cultureless minority with no identity in their own country.

Don't believe me?

Try and suggest that whites need explicit and exclusive political, scholastic, and cultural groups that work in their collective self-interest. Go ahead and every moron will scream racism. You'll have Whites lecture you on how we're all "part of the human race." They won't lecture non-whites ever. A black preacher or politician can talk about "my people" but whites are forbidden. Das rassist!

Whenever you hear the word racist just know it means - I hate you because you're white.

Brian Niemeier #wingnut #sexist brianniemeier.com

Western civilization now stands in a state of war. It is always a culture's hale young men who are called upon to defend against the barbarian at the gate.

In this case, the barbarians are already inside the gates, and many of them are our own women.

Relevant to this issue, the female preference for the Death Cult isn't as pronounced among married women.

Yes, young men are being asked to jump on a grenade that has a 50/50 chance of being live. Young men have been asked--and expected--to do the same throughout history. Society calls upon men to sacrifice our fortunes and lives because, biologically speaking, we are the expendable sex.

Complaining about that fact won't change it. That's why, however pure their intentions, MGTOWs will always be viewed as whiners by society at large.

Now, there's a big factor in the marriage vs. MGTOW debate that everybody misses. They miss it because it's a spiritual dimension, and as late Moderns we've been conditioned to regard spiritual matters as tertiary concerns at best.

That overlooked dimension is the matter of a man's vocation to a particular state in life. If your're working from a default view of man as a bald ape produced by blind chemical processes, marriage doesn't make much sense.

[...]

One big sign that God may not want you to marry is that you simply have no desire to marry. I'm not talking about cads who just want the milk without paying for the cow. I'm talking about the rare breed of men who aren't interested in fornication--or any form of sexual immorality, and can get along just fine without female company. Our licit desires and dispositions are good indicators of God's will for us because He uses them to lead us onto the path He's set. You might ask, "Why don't these guys just go be priests?" The reason is that if a man isn't properly disposed to be a temporal father, he's not disposed to be a spiritual father.

Rare cases aside, most MGTOWs do have sex drives but have sworn off marriage to avoid getting raked over the coals in divorce court. In the spiritual context, it's not hard to see that this movement is largely a result of the vocations crisis following Vatican II. A lot of MGTOWs are probably guys with frustrated vocations to the priesthood or religious life.

The point is, you're never going to find fulfillment by exclusively pursuing your material self-interest. True fulfillment only comes from sacrificing yourself for others.

Meanwhile, a key part of my literary legacy is still on sale for 99 cents!

woh kavi #fundie archive.today

Male fantasies allow us to escape into worlds that lie far away but remain curiously familiar. While Mordor and a galaxy far far away might superficially contrast with the world we live in, they still function on a set of rules and paradigms that are accessible to us in the real world. Whether it’s the expansionist nature of Mordor or the corrupt politics that would be the downfall of the Galactic Republic, these fantastical worlds are governed by the same general principles that govern our world. Similarly, one could immediately relate to the ethical dilemmas encountered by Captain Picard and his crew aboard the Enterprise, such as the question of when to break the Prime Directive.

The female fantasy is exactly the other way around. While the settings of these fantasies may seem familiar to us, these worlds are based on a set of rules that are illogical and improbable. What are the odds of anybody’s biography resembling Fifty Shades of Grey? Yet because the setting resembles the real world, the female mind has difficulty separating reality from fantasy.

This might possibly explain how women live through contradictions without reconciling them; because they are simply not aware of them. This possibly explains how women can live of a man’s charity (alimony, child support) while still declaring themselves “strong and independent.” This explains how women can have consensual sex and yet genuinely convince themselves that they were raped. This explains how women can think that single mothers are the greatest thing since sliced bread despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Women do not do these things out of malice, but rather, they are simply too self-absorbed to know any better.

Female solipsism prevents the fairer sex from adequately grasping the principles of justice and fairness. Some readers will be quick to point out a list of highly successful female rulers throughout history such as Queens Victoria, Elizabeth, Noor Jahan, and Laxmibai (a symbol of Indian resistance against the British). But it is worthwhile to point out that these women functioned within the bounds of patriarchal societies and did not attempt to overthrow the prevailing order. Queen Laxmibai resisted British imperialism in India and was slain on the battlefield. She didn’t fight against the “oppression of women,” but rather against the oppression of her kingdom and all subjects therein. This is why she is rightly revered as a true patriot all over India to this day. We know that feminists do not make good patriots.

Many readers would also bandy about the argument that “Men start all the wars!” This argument is bogus and invalid because it assumes that men are a class in the Marxist sense of the word. It assumes that everyone born with a Y chromosome, regardless of culture, race, and religion, belongs to this homogenous internationalist class. When viewed from this demented perspective, the largely peaceful men of Malaysia assume moral responsibility for the barbarism of warlike cultures like the Afghans and Aztecs.

Leftist nonsense generally aims to undermine race, family, religion, and nation; the pillars of an individual’s identity. Upon their ruin the liberal will assign individuals with a new Marxist class identity that comes with it’s own handy-dandy two-dimensional historical narrative which is anything but historical.

It’s been stated before that the true test of a group’s integrity is measured by how liberal-minded they are when they are the majority. As our corrupt elites continue to empower their pet classes (women, gays, immigrants), I wonder if said groups will display the same degree of tolerance towards the western men that sacrificed their self-interests on a matter of principle.

czakal #racist diversitymachtfrei.wordpress.com

The second twist is Beinart’s inclusion of Biblical references to support his case.

Much Jewish sophistry intended for internal consumption contains lame Biblical references like these designed to lend the demands, which are fundamentally driven by Jewish ethnic self-interest, an air of moral plausibility and divine sanction. As with almost all Jewish sophistry, it falls apart on closer examination.

The three Biblical anecdotes Beinart cites to explain why Jews should be nice to immigrants are the episodes in which Abraham and his nephew Lot welcome strangers into their homes and one in which Abraham resides temporarily in Egypt. Here are the relevant portions of his article.

The worst anti-Semitic attack in American history occurred while Jews around the world were reading the Torah portion that tells the story of Lot, an immigrant.
Lot moves to Sodom, and prospers there. The Midrash says he becomes a judge. His daughters intermarry with the locals. Then one day, while sitting at the gates of the city, the assimilating immigrant sees two strangers approach. He asks them to “spend the night and bathe your feet”— the Midrash says he learned to welcome strangers from his uncle Abraham, the first Jew. Lot “prepares them a feast.”

But in Sodom, the natives hate strangers. “Where are the men who came to you tonight?” they demand. “Bring them out to us.” Lot tries to protect his guests. “I beg you friends,” he implores, “do not commit such a wrong.” For the men of Sodom, however, this just underscores Lot’s foreignness. He hasn’t really assimilated; he isn’t one of them. He’s a threat. “The fellow came here an immigrant and already acts the ruler,” they declare. “Now we will deal worse with you than with them.”

…As Parsha Vayera suggests, welcoming the stranger is among the most fundamental Jewish imperatives. Lot “baked unleavened” bread for the strangers who came to Sodom. The parallel to the exodus from Egypt is clear. Lot and Abraham welcomed strangers; Pharaoh oppressed them. And 36 times in the Torah Jews are reminded to be like Abraham and Lot: To remember the heart of the stranger because were strangers in the land of Egypt.

In Abraham’s case, the guests tell Abraham that his wife, Sarah, shall bear him a child, even though she is old.

In Lot’s case, the guests shepherd Lot and his family out of the city, Sodom, so they can escape its impending destruction.

According to Beinart, this proves that good things happen to Jews when they are nice to strangers.

Now let’s proceed to a critical examination of these claims.

First, Abraham had left his place of origin, Ur, and entered someone else’s country, Canaan, which, as their names suggests, belonged to the Canaanites.

Abraham and the Lord (the projected image of the Jewish tribal ego) planned to dispossess the Canaanites of their land.

“The Canaanite was then in the land”. This phrase, or variants of it, appear several times in the Biblical text. They, of course, imply that the Canaanites are no longer in their land at the time the Bible was written, because they have been dispossessed and destroyed by the Jews.

When Canaan experienced a famine, Abram and his wife “sojourned” in Egypt. Abraham told his wife, Sarai, to pretend she was his sister so he could pimp her out as a marriage prospect to the local Egyptian notables. (Genesis 12)

Both Sarai and Abram (their names became Sarah and Abraham later) were well treated by the Pharaoh.

The Pharaoh, however, found that his land was soon tormented by plagues. When he inquired into the reasons for this, he learned that Sarai was Abram’s wife, not his sister, and the “Lord” was punishing him for this. Even then, after discovering that the proto-Jew Abram had grossly and basely deceived him, the Pharaoh doesn’t harm him but permits him to go peaceably on his way, even allowing him to retain the riches he had acquired.

Let’s come now to the anecdotes in Genesis 18 & 19 where Abraham and Lot are nice to “strangers” and arrange for them to be given food and shelter.

Abraham knew that the guests were not normal guests, but were somehow mystical emissaries of God. He surely doesn’t deserve much moral credit, then, for choosing to be nice to them.

It’s not clear from the Biblical text whether Lot also knew his guests were mystical emissaries of God although there is a hint that he did. In any case, when he welcomes them into his house, the people of the town crowd round about, asking to have a look at them. Lot refuses to let them and, bizarrely, offers his daughters up to be gang-raped in order to protect the immigrants.

The townspeople decline this offer and insist on having a look at the “guests”. Their suspicion is entirely justified because the guests are there to destroy the city and, in fact, do destroy it the following day. The Jews welcomed in and sheltered the “immigrants” (angels) who ultimately destroyed the city, killing all of its inhabitants except the Jews.

All three of the Biblical anecdotes referenced by Beinart have the following elements in common:
* Jews enter a land that isn’t theirs.
* In contrast to what Beinart implies, they are initially welcomed and well-treated by the locals.
* In the course of time, the behaviour of the Jews arouses suspicion and anger.
* Jews then bring ruin upon the original inhabitants of the land they have entered. To the Canaanites they bring death and dispossession. To the Egyptians, they bring plague. To the inhabitants of Sodom (Sodomites!), they bring complete annihilation.

In every case, the local people who were nice to the Jews and accepted them as immigrants or refugees are ultimately harmed or destroyed by them and their vicious God.
Beinart thinks this proves that Jews should be nice to immigrants. I think it proves Gentiles should be suspicious of Jews.

Ted Nugent #fundie rightwingwatch.org

As a large, in charge, Motown black man my bad-self, who honed my Sonic Baptizm, soul-cleansing soulmusic on the greasy rhythm and blues of the musical funk and roll gods James Brown and Chuck Berry et al., and who learned and then perfected the fine art of American defiance from my hero Rosa Parks, I continue to celebrate nonstop all things good and black.

My motto has always been: Black is beautiful. Minimal exposure to my killer Detroit guitar playing would immediately reveal why I was voted the No. 1 Guitarist Alltime in Michigan a few years back. No cracker can play like that!

If you don’t like it, well funk you very much.

February is the month some Americans celebrate black history. Remembering history is good. A wise person once said that those who fail to remember history are doomed to repeat it. And sadly, repeat it we do.

It’s been over 50 years that the modern slave masters known as the Democratic Party created policies and programs designed to keep black folk down. Through their scamming so-called anti-poverty programs, the Democratic Party has enslaved far too many black Americans into a life of poverty.

Poverty runs rampant in our communities. Unemployment amongst my black brothers and sisters is double that of white Americans. And what does the Democratic Party propose doing? The same scams it has been pulling off for the past 50 years: enticing black folk to look to Uncle Sugar for the cure when it’s been Uncle Sugar who has put black folk on the poverty plantation.

…

The Democratic Party has preyed on black brothers and sisters for too long. What they have done to black America is arguably a crime against humanity. They have essentially killed the dream of the promised land that brother Martin Luther King spoke about, yet the NAACP, the Congressional Black Caucus and others still support the Democratic Party. Simply amazing.

Black power begins with recognizing who our real enemies are and who are friends are. The Democratic Party is nothing more than a pack of wolves festooned in shiny, white sheepskin. The Democratic Party has conned us into voting for them for decades, and in every instance, our votes for them have been against our own economic self-interest.

The Distributist #racist twitter.com

Let's explore. If you are of indigenous European origin and you say "I am White" then under this explanation you are admitting to membership in a malicious conspiracy to commit hard to other groups. You are therefore painting yourself as a villain with a target on your back. If you say there is someway to stop being "White" why haven't you done it yet? Or have you? I look at wokesters and I don't see saints but petty and self-interested cowards.

What is this new baptism of non-whiteness and how does it have such little evidence in your soul?

Suppose for instance you say "I don't consider myself White". Do you then walk around saying this at woke gatherings? I come from a blue city and I know this doesn't fly. Try this and you will be accused of being EVEN MORE MALICIOUS by denying your privilege. So we end up with a catch-22. You claim Whiteness or deny it and either way you are maliciously attacking non-whites. Sounds pretty shitty right?

Now remember this is the dilemma that progressives are commending for ALL OF OUR CHILDREN. Such moral heroes.

Ted Cruz #fundie rawstory.com

Both Republican and Democratic candidates have been courting Jewish voters ahead of Tuesday"s New York primary vote, looking for an edge in competitive districts with large Jewish populations.

Orthodox Jews, who make up a significant portion of New York"s Jewish population, have become an important bloc in the New York primary for both parties.

Ted Cruz and John Kasich recently visited matzah bakeries in Brooklyn, while Donald Trump met with a group of reporters representing Orthodox news outlets.

Some candidates have even launched Yiddish-language ad campaigns micro-targeting New York"s Hasidic population.

While Orthodox Jews tend to lean more Republican than Democrat by a margin of 55% to 31%, some Hasidic sects, including the staunchly anti-Zionist Satmar, have lent their support in the past to Democratic candidates.

Yiddish flyers distributed by a pro-Sanders group and bearing the official logo of the Sanders campaign, have targeted this niche audience by emphasizing the Vermont Senator"s disapproval of Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

Some of the flyers even employ the Hebrew curse "may the name of the wicked rot" in regards to Israel"s Prime Minister.

"Some self-interested haredi figures have attacked the Democratic candidate for president, Bernie Sanders, calling on [the Jewish public] not to vote for him. The real reason [for their opposition] is because Sanders refuses to bow down to radical right-wing Zionists, and because he does not agree with the radical policies of Netanyahu, may the name of the wicked rot".

By comparison, a Yiddish advertisement run by the Cruz campaign touted the Texas Senator"s conservative bona fides and religious faith.

"Presidential candidate Ted Cruz is the first and only since President Reagan who believes that God is the one who decides who will be elected president of the US, which is why he is confident that he will be elected."

Anders #fundie new.euro-med.dk

Illuminati/Masonic Dehumanisation of the Masses

[...]

In a world of ignorance, apathy, gross contradiction, cognitive dissonance and denial … what will it take for the masses to wake up? Granted, they have been deceived, but living in zombie-like trances they lack responsibility towards themselves and their fellow humans: It’s therefore no surprise to see them buy into the effronteries and blindly give their consent to the ruling elite’s agendas, not knowing about the underlying hidden, dark and destructive ulterior motives.

A major effect of these agendas is that they are dehumanizing. In light of this, here are 5 indicators to show how the ruling elite’s agendas are covertly dehumanizing the masses on many levels for manipulation, and what needs to be done to prevent the disastrous consequences.

For instance, in a recent article, Google engineering director Ray Kurzweil and here in so many words, claims that a stronger, brighter and sexier human race will emerge before 2045. Enhanced Homo sapiens Mk-2 will have had their brains fused with technology, belong in a technological cybernetic society to become a singularity… -Some of us can’t help thinking that this is something to greatly mistrust.

See Project Moscow 2045 – started by media mogul Itskov: The Devil speaks and rejoices.
Ray Kurzweil is Jewish – and Dmitry Itskov, the author of “Moscow 2045” has a Jewish surname from the Minsk region

Here follow 5 characteristics of the NWO dehumanisation/Making of Zombies.

I: The transhumanism agenda is a deception. Retrospectively, just about everything the ruling elite do only benefits a relative small handful of individuals and transhumanism will be no exception. Through the technology, the rest of the populace will be enslaved in a technological mind control prison…

The more humans who incorporate themselves with cybernetics or anything else making up transhumanism, the more they will lose their powerful connection to spirituality and all those qualities related to unconditional love; kindness, empathy, generosity, big-heartedness, concern… Thus, humans will lose their true power to stop the new world order and may even become extinct.
Transhumanism is greatly flawed. Major tenets of transhumanism are based on false pretexts. For example, it assumes that consciousness is only activity in our brains in its attempt to preserve the brain and achieve immortality…

II: The artificial intelligence (AI) flaw
Following on, while it has made great science fiction, the idea of robots or computers becoming intelligent sentient beings, having the ability to be emotional and creative will never happen in the real world.

The Express 23 June 2016: BRUSSELS bureaucrats are considering transferring human rights to robots if artificial intelligence (AI) becomes so powerful that droids end up thinking for themselves.
the European Parliament to the EU Commission has suggested in the future sentient AI robots could need their own rights and responsibilities, and strict laws banning them from taking over too many jobs across the Continent may become necessary. In the 1950s Asimov predicted robots would eventually have to adhere to laws

*******************************************************************************

Everything a robot or computer does (or ever will) is only through a series of pre-programmed responses in conjunction with its database, having no free will choice.

And that’s it.

3. The hive mind
Transhumanism and AI threaten to dehumanize us in the respects that it will take away our individuality. Instead of being free to express our natural unique creative and playful individuality, we will be forced to become ‘empty shells,’ as one with the hive mind. When the control-obsessed technocrats try to force their depersonalizing hive mind ideology it will cause many problems and humans are sure to revolt(???).

Just one of many flaws in the technocracy agenda.

5. T.H.E.Y want you to be like them
T.H.E.Y (The Hierarchy Enslaving You) want you to be heartless empty shell psychopaths, driven by self-interests and gratification in their hierarchical controlling pyramidal power structures…

T.H.E.Y want you to be the effect of their owned and controlled mainstream media, as, for instance, through the soul-jarring music blasting out and TV or movies where people are so horrible to each other…

Fake mainstream media news, fake money, fake medicine, fake political democracies, fake wars, etc. – as if that wasn’t enough, T.H.E.Y want you to willingly fit into their archontic fake existence through transhumanism … ultimately leading to your destruction, as secretly planned…

That concludes just 5 of the many indicators showing how the ruling elite’s agendas are dehumanizing the masses.

Fading Light #racist stormfront.org

Re: Boyfriend has non-white bestfriend...

So basically he's saying that our race can die and our nations can fall as long as he gets to keep his so-called friend. Has he ever asked this "friend" what he thinks about the Mexican invasion of America? No, he wouldn't DARE ask that, would he. That's because he knows his "friend" would never tolerate pointing out the obvious since it is not in the racial self-interest of his "friend" to do so.

So in other words, his "friend" puts his own racial well-being above that of your boyfriend, where the former depends critically upon the destruction of the latter.

Some friend!

If you're feeling brave, you might point out that maybe he's never had a real friend and that's why he can't tell that this guy isn't one. I learned this lesson myself the day my family attacked me for opposing the genocide of my race.

rubi_con_man #fundie forums.fark.com

["Yeah, because "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" belongs in a public building. I'm not offended by the Ten Commandments on buildings any more than I'm offended by graffiti on the sides of public buildings. They're both illegal, but the former is far more illegal than the later."]


See, this is what I'm talking about. So having the other 9 commandments is okay with you? It's just the first? I doubt that. The very Idea that anyone would obey not out of self-interest, but out of love and respect for a being who is so much more than you could possibly comprehend ... that's what bothers you.

I understand it's painful to be surrounded by the truth - but don't take it out on others because you feel inadequate in the face of the divine. It'll pass. We'll pray for you.

Ricardo Duchesne #racist #crackpot #wingnut eurocanadian.ca

The white race is uniquely altruistic. Why? This is a very difficult question to answer. It is easy to understand altruistic behavior for the benefit of one's family members. This is common among animals. Mother bears will put their lives in danger to protect their cubs from attack. Sacrifices for one's relatives and in-group ethnic members are also common. The difficult question is: why whites are singularly motivated to perform actions that benefit members of out-groups when such actions harm their ingroup members and families? This is known in dissident circles as "pathological altruism". The Antislavery Movement One would think that the existence of a huge literature on the subject of altruism would have provided us with definite answers about the unique nature of white altruism. Not really. Since any discussion about racial differences is prohibited in academia, this behavior is invariably framed as if it were a disposition among humans in general.

White academics habitually project their altruistic behaviors to humans as humans. Kevin MacDonald is one of a few evolutionary psychologists who understands that whites are singularly altruistic outside their kin-group, and that explaining this behavior requires a Darwinian approach that is wedded to the history of whites. This is the subject of chapter 7 of his book Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition. He argues that the "moral idealism in the British antislavery movement", which led to the abolition of the slave trade in 1807 and slavery in 1833, offers an excellent case study of the nature and historical origins of white pathological altruism. Without overlooking other psychological motivations which generally come into play among leaders in all movements, such as ambition, personal gain, including the satisfaction of being praised as a selfless individual, MacDonald carefully goes over the antislavery sentiments expressed over many decades, starting in the eighteenth century, by Quakers, Evangelical Anglicans, and Methodists. The leaders of the antislavery movement were sincerely empathetic individuals moved by the suffering of others.

The influential Marxist explanation that the campaign against slavery occurred only when it was no longer advantageous for capitalism to exploit slave labor is seriously flawed. One would expect an evolutionary psychologist to be drawn to an explanation that emphasizes the economic self-interests of whites. But as we have seen in our multipart review of MacDonald's book, this type of explanation misses out the singularity whites have exhibited throughout history in creating communities with ideological norms that encouraged trust beyond one's family network. As we saw in Part 3 of my extended review, whites exhibited WEIRD behaviors early on in their history. Back in the age of hunting and gathering they were more inclined to extend their trust to members of outside tribes (because this was a naturally advantageous strategy in the climes of northwest Europe). In contrast, trust in the non-Western world was restricted to ingroup members. In the course of time, whites came to exhibit more WEIRD traits, such as monogamous behaviors among powerful men despite their natural instinct for polygamy. The Catholic Church nurtured norms inside the "higher" frontal parts of the brain capable of inducing guilt and fear of godly punishment among powerful men who failed to control their sexual drives.
...
MacDonald's point is not that whites were wrong to seek the abolition of slavery. His aim is to understand the excessive moral preoccupation whites exhibited about the plight of Africans coupled with their current pathological empathy for aggressive immigrants occupying their lands. In light of this reality, and the complete indifference Muslims have to this day about their thousand-year old enslavement of Africans, these Puritan-descended movements do seem incredibly naive, child-like, and devoid of realism. What is there to admire about this?

Cactus clawfinger #fundie reddit.com

Honestly, the left really fucked us, and themselves. Without aggressive ethnic replacement programs, the west could be as accommodating towards minority groups as it wanted, hell even keep anti-white discrimination policies in place to get the warm and fuzzies. Now the stage has been set for a massive civilizational conflict, like Sunnis and Shia fighting over control of Iraq in zero sum fashion.
I hardly think pro-white advocacy is illegitimate, all other groups do it all the time. Difference is, your not going to sit in on an NAACP meeting and hear people talk about physically removing whites and instigating a race war. I don't get why this is so hard to understand that this is a dead end.
South Africa is a shitshow. The whites fighting to maintain apartheid have been pretty much vindicated (at least in terms of existential self-interest, if not morally) as it looks like the country is going the way of Zimbabwe. I suppose it just depends which side your loyalties lie. Just like Israel vs. Palestine is an existential struggle where good guys vs. bad guys doesn't matter so much if you have to live there.

To compare America to South Africa or Zimbabwe is way overblown, however. If you're sucked in to the 24/7 outrage news cycle, you might think the sky is falling. I've lived in a multi-cultural area for over 10 years, including shitty neighborhoods, and the legitimate episodes of racial conflict I've seen I could count on one hand and have most of my fingers left over. People for the most part get along. There are ways to advocate for white interests, or fight to assure white homogeneity in certain areas of the U.S., without having to adopt an absolutely sociopathic orientation towards non-whites, in a way that might actually work and seem fair enough to the average person. The alt-right as I see it, is not doing this, even though a simple raising of awareness of their ideology is pushing people to the right in favor of idiotic, delusional leftism.

Eric Crowley #sexist returnofkings.com

WHY PATRIARCHY IS THE GREATEST SOCIAL SYSTEM EVER CREATED

In the feminist creation myth, patriarchy is original sin. It is the Lucifer from which all evils flow. Without patriarchy, we would all live in a genderless role-less feminist garden of Eden.

However, just as the name Lucifer actually means light-bringer, patriarchy is actually an enlightening influence which has brought humanity out of the mud into civilization. Feminism only exists in the shadow of the massive abundance produced by patriarchy. Patriarchy is not the enemy. Patriarchy is the greatest social system ever created.

soarfrank

The Myth of Patriarchy
Feminists ascribe all social ills to patriarchy. Like a medieval inquisitor looking for evidence of the devil, patriarchy’s influence is supposedly all around us – our media, our schools, and even our most intimate relationships. Patriarchy is responsible for domestic violence, lost promotions, mean comments on twitter – even women’s own feeling about themselves.

Anyone who doesn’t subscribe to feminist dogma is believed to be possessed by the influence of patriarchy and in need of exorcism by an ordained Priest of the Cathedral of gender studies theory. They are forced to renounce their views, or face excommunication from the public sphere. In more honest times, the dominant religion simply called freethinkers “heretics” and burned them at the stake.

Origins Of Patriarchy
In reality, there is nothing so mysterious about patriarchy. Patriarchy is a division of social roles based in natural biological gender differences.

Males and females have very obvious self-evident biological differences. Women can have babies. Men cannot. Women’s bodies are designed for nurturing, with wombs, breasts, and hormonal cycles. During pregnancy, women are unable to physically exert themselves. Men’s bodies are designed for physical exertion, and as a whole, physically stronger.

Imagine you are part of a small tribe in a survival situation. Conquest, war, famine, death – any of the four horsemen could strike at any moment. How would you divide social roles?

As Jack Donovan states in The Way of Men:

Because your group is struggling to survive, every choice matters. If you give the wrong person the wrong job, that person could die, you could die, another person could die, or you could all die. Because of the differences between the sexes, the best person for jobs that involve exploring, hunting, fighting, building, or defending is usually going to be male. This is not some arbitrary cultural prejudice; it is the kind of vital strategic determination you need to keep your group alive.

frank_frazetta_tarzanandtheantmen-smaller

In other words, traditional roles are the basis of our survival as a species.

The Sacrifice Of Men
In patriarchy, men sacrifice their energy, their time, and sometimes even their lives for the betterment of women and children, and women give themselves to nurturing children and families.

Feminists define patriarchy as a system of dominance, in which men oppress women. This redefines men’s sacrifice as an act of control, rather than love. Many men are perfectly happy to have sex with women without offering any protection or value to the woman or her resulting children. It is an act of love that men willingly give up their freedom in order to provide for women, and their young.

Patriarchy is about love. It is about the love of human beings in families, tribes, and small communities working interdependently for the benefit of one another.

Feminism Was Created By Capitalism
Feminism in it’s modern form began in the last hundred years, when industrialization moved our economic survival from requiring hard labor to requiring skilled labor. Work used to require hours of physical lifting, now it requires sitting at a desk. This transition made it possible for even the weakest women to work.

Employees are much easier to manage as interchangeable cogs than as gendered individuals with unique needs. In fact, convincing women to work doubles the size of the work force, allowing employers to half everyone’s wages. It’s simple supply and demand. As the book Revolution From Above chronicles, early feminist movements – even Marxist feminists – were bankrolled by major capitalists in order to increase the workforce and lower wages.

CapitalismAndTheExploitationOfWomen

Feminism is a product of capitalism. The “you can have it all” message is an attempt by corporations to swindle women out of their biological needs. If you’re a feminist, you’re a capitalist, because you’ve make work a greater priority than community, children, or love.

In families, each member is irreplaceable, but in a company everyone is replaceable. In patriarchy, women toiled for one man who loved her and the children he gave her. In capitalism, women work for many men completely indifferent to her and willing to disposes of her the moment cheaper labor appears.

Feminism Commodifies Relationships
In patriarchy, selfish relationship impulses were restrained. In capitalism, they are encouraged. Each member of a tribe of community works for the benefit of those around him, but in capitalism men and women are independent agents, with no loyalty or duty to anyone else.

Roles that were traditionally played by family are now outsourced. Group homes for the elderly, day care for the children. Even mentors and friends can be bought in the form of therapists and life coaches.

This system destroys intimate relationships. It selfishly benefits a woman to bear the children of strong lone alpha’s rather than the man providing for her. It selfishly benefits a man to impregnate every available fertile woman with no intention of further contact. Alpha fucks, beta bucks.

Feminism has created a war between the sexes with each side trying to maximize their profits in the sexual marketplace while spending as little as possible. We’re all little atomized corporations united only by the laws of bio-mechanics.

steinberg_war-of-the-roses

Men Have Lost Reason To Work
This new dynamic has freed men from work. In his new book Bachelor Pad Economics, Aaron Clarey advocates a minimalist approach to money – buy only what your need and using your time for your benefit rather than a corporation’s. This approach is already being taken as men drop out of the system, earn less than women, and avoid higher eduction.

The reason men worked hard was to provide for their families. Men didn’t work long hours out of self-interest. They did so out of love. Most men can subsist on very little. It’s been said that civilization was created to impress the opposite gender. Without reward, there is no reason to work. No carrot, no jump.

As a society, we’ve reached a point where technology has eliminated the need for everyone to work. Just as capitalism freed women from their natural role, it’s freed men from theirs. Masculinity has been reduced to a fashion statement.

Return To The Natural Order
While we understand that animals exists in natural groups – a herd, a flock, a pack – we forget that man is an animal too. Man’s natural group is the tribe. Humans are mammals. We learn through relationships, rather than instinct.

Ajna-Nursing-Acorn-Community-Virginia-2006-650x486

Children require love, attachment, and stability that can only be found in emotional bonds with present adults. They are not interchangeable cogs. You can’t buy a mother’s love or a father’s wisdom. Love cannot be outsourced. Authentic love is only possible within patriarchal community.

To a company, non-working children are a nuisance. The epidemic of single motherhood, plummeting birthrates, and mental illness is due to the rejection of traditional roles. If society wants healthy happy children and loving stable communities, it must embrace the lost values of patriarchy.

In the early tribes, humans were entirely dependent on one another. Now they are independent and unsatisfied. Returning to traditional roles means living interdependently, and align with the natural order not because we have to, but because we choose to. We could exist alone, but we are fulfilled together.

Of course, feminists will call this oppressive. They want you to be free – free from community, free from belonging, free from love. A mass of apes fighting over the highest value mate behind a gilded cage.

ffleft

Back to the mud, or back to the kitchen, the choice is yours.

bdollars21-1 #fundie imdb.com

However, atheistic materialism not only promotes self-interest, but DICTATES it albeit unknowingly to most. In atheism, there is no objective reason to be moral other than the mystery 'human values' you arbitrarily conjure up. There is EVERY good reason for you to look out for number one and to rape, kill and dominate everything that crosses your path. You should be the ultimate indulgent. There is absolutely NO good reason why you shouldn't be, the only thing holding you back is your cowardice to step on other people's toes. Not that it matters, since there are no meaningful consequences and you merely 'fall asleep' at death anyway. Why not live life to its sickest, most brutal 'fullest'?

CertifiedRabbi #racist reddit.com

Most people are sheep. They conform to what their entertainment industry, their news media, their education system, and their government tells them. You see this all across the world. And the world is united in combating White racism and bigotry, especially the White and Jewish elites of Western society and non-Whites generally for obvious reasons. The entire world is literally conspiring to mindfuck the White race and keep us cucked.
On the one hand I guess that you can't really blame them because we Whites being the superior race gives us the power to essentially do whatever we want. The entire non-White world could team up to defeat us and we'd still crush them with relative ease. And the threat of unified and self-interested racist White people is always looming in the minds of people that want to keep us tied down like Gulliver. Modern military technology + a return to the era of White Supremacy is literally an existential threat to all non-Whites. A redpilled version of NATO + Russia could easily conquer the entire world.
But on the other hand this effort to mindfuck us has clearly gone too far. It's made White people suicidal on a racial scale. Just because White people have the power to eradicate all non-Whites doesn't mean that we'll actually go through with it if we abandon pathologically self-loathing liberal ideology.
Hopefully our survival instincts will eventually kick in some day and we'll finally stop being susceptible to the tactic of White Guilt. But we can't become complacent or blackpilled because then our racial demise will become a self-fulfilling prophecy. We always have to keep striving to redpill as many of our fellow White brothers and sisters as possible because the consequences of defeat are unthinkable. If we can't turn this trend around, then our race will pretty much become like White people in South Africa - a despised and powerless minority.
Pro-White movements might have been annihilated by the (((1960s liberal cultural revolution))), but we're slowly regaining ground again. Even though most White people are still degenerate, self-loathing cucks, White people are more redpilled today than they were 10 years ago. Who knows how redpilled the White race will be 10, 20, and 30 years from now.
Another massive advantage that we have on our side is reality. As you stated, race and violent crime statistics completely debunk anti-racist ideology, so do race and IQ statistics and studies that have looked the effects of ethnic diversity. We also have the demographic statistics to cite to White people to prove to them that our race will go extinct in the next couple of centuries if they don't abandon anti-racist liberal ideology and adopt a healthy level of ethnocentrism. Most White people might not be interested in that data now, but they will be in the future as they realize that we're going to lose our countries.
There's also always the chance that Muslim terrorists will finally use a WMD on a major Western city. That may be enough to finally wake up the critical mass of White people that is needed in order to overthrow our current liberal power structures. Even another terrorist attack on the scale of 9/11 may be enough to finally make the collective White psyche snap and stop being so damn suicidally tolerant of the Other. That's why I'm actually opposed to right-wing calls for tough-on-crime policing and strong counterterrorism policies.
I probably shouldn't be saying this, but non-White crime and terrorism (especially against White people) is actually exactly what we need in order to force White people to wake up from the liberal brain trance. If we have to stand aside and allow a few thousand White people to get massacred by savage people of color, then that's a small price to pay in order to galvanize an ideological revolution across the White Western world. Right now White people are slowly being boiled alive. They need a sharp spike in temperature in order to realize that they're slowly being cooked.

Edeassail #racist reddit.com

You act like I told them to become massively over represented in the institutions pushing anti-white shit. Jews, at least Ashkenazi Jews, have a relatively high average IQ (somewhere between 105 and 115), and a very high amount of nepotistic networking which has allowed them to become incredibly over represented in higher level social, economic, and political institutions in historically white countries, and most recently the United States. Them pushing multiculturalism nonsense is just them acting in their own ethnic self-interest. Jews are obsessed with the holocaust as a foundational property of their modern identity, and think that eradicating any sense of white identity, and flooding our countries with non-whites makes it harder for them to stand out and be singled out as a group. To them whites are the ultimate threat, even if in the long term this may not be true. And before you say they just care about equality look at this poll on affirmative action. Jewish support for affirmative action increases when the policies are framed as if they harm whites rather than if they help minorities.

Anna Breslaw #racist tabletmag.com

Since I was 12 I’ve had an unappealing, didactic distrust of people with the extreme will to live. My father’s parents were Holocaust survivors, and in grade school I received the de rigueur exposure to the horror—visiting geriatric men and women with numbers tattooed on their arms, completing assigned reading like The Diary of Anne Frank and Night. But the more information I received, the less sympathy the survivors elicited from me. Each time we clapped for the old Hungarian lady who spoke about Dachau, each time Elie Wiesel threw another anonymous anecdote of betrayal onto a page, I eyed it askance, thinking What did you do that you’re not talking about? I had the gut instinct that these were villains masquerading as victims who, solely by virtue of surviving (very likely by any means necessary), felt that they had earned the right to be heroes, their basic, animal self-interest dressed up with glorified phrases like “triumph of the human spirit.”

I wondered if anyone had alerted Hitler that in the event that the final solution didn’t pan out, only the handful of Jews who actually fulfilled the stereotype of the Judenscheisse (because every group has a few) would remain to carry on the Jewish race—conniving, indestructible, taking and taking.

Emily B #fundie truthintexastextbooks.com

Emily B overcame major “computer” challenges and remained a loyal TTT member, her thoughts:

It’s been a blessing to be on the TTT committee with so many great Americans. As my first experience reviewing I felt it was an opportunity to make a difference in the lives of millions of school children. It did take time but it was worth every minute. I homeschooled my own children in the seventies and have seen a rapid decline in material available. Some of the more shocking entries in the five textbooks I reviewed include the following:

The United States is a democracy, evolution is a fact, Islam taught the equality of all before Allah, Allah is the Universal Lord, Muslims repressed hatred, Muslims were not prepared for the barbarity of the Christian Crusades, Muhammad raised the status of women, Muslims respect the contributions of Jesus, Muslims repressed hatred and Islamic civilization surpassed Europe in skilled artisans, sciences and medicine.

On a political note: possible sexual improprieties on the president’s part referring to Bill Clinton, abortion demonstrators were depicted as peaceful while pro-lifers were violent and bomb throwers, Democrats viewed as positive, Republicans as flawed, Planned Parenthood given a good report, population explosion was out of control, excessive condemnation of Europeans and Americans concerning slave trade, “it’s easy to get depressed about climate change”, in a free enterprise system producers are motivated by self-interest, 9/11 terrorist not identified as Islamic, and commercial drilling in Mexico is risky, It can cause earthquakes.

Mao, Hitler, Stalin, and Marx are referred to as either successful or powerful leaders. Very little said about their brutal mentality and murderous escapades. In a time line, Russia is credited with winning the space race. No mention of America putting the first man on the moon. Gorbachev praised as beginning reform programs to end the Cold War. No mention of Reagan’s historic speech, “Mr. Gorbachev…” Hillary Clinton given a glowing report and Reagan not mentioned. (We were told the publishers “inadvertently” left out President Reagan).

Included in photos were four pictures of mosques with no pictures of churches, a picture of many country’s flags with no American flag, dead women and children strewn on a path in Viet Nam with the caption; “victims of American soldiers”. A series of videos were available including one titled “Are mites having sex on my face?” All videos were preceded by 30-60 second advertisements. A disturbing idea proposed in the last book promoted Common Core throughout including having the eleven year olds matched with adult pen-pals from around the world. What was left out was also surprising, for example in the discussion of the Alamo, Santa Anna was mentioned but not Bowie, Crockett or Houston.

Cybersex is our hope #sexist #transphobia incels.co

Feminism imploding because of trannies

So apparently there is a total civil war between faggots/trannies and feminists.
Basically feminists invented gender ideology in the 90's to push feminism into institution without openly using the termine feminism.
Unfortunately foids have zero abstract capabilities so they didn't foresee how it could have backfired in the future.

Now they noticed there are 100% dudes who can say they feel a woman and they must accept them into their sports, toilets, groups, in diversity quotas, retiremen age etc...
So they are backtracking en masse and saying XY individuals can't be considered fully female and tradcucks are backing them.
So there is a funny af shitshow where feminazis and trannies shit on each other all over the web and trannies/faggots are being blackpilled on female nature understanding how foids never form an alliance because of idealism and justice but only for self-interest and pragmatism. Once they don't need you any longer you are thrown under the bus.
Wellcome to the blackpill club, faggots

W. F. Price #fundie the-spearhead.com

There’s something of the herd animal in every human, but in women it’s particularly pronounced. This is why there’s something evil about pushing women to sacrifice their self-interests on the basis of some trend, or so that a few people can reap profits from it (e.g. divorce). And by its nature, this corporate rat race can only reward the few; most women (along with most men) don’t have what it takes to be corporate captains of finance like Sheryl Sandberg, and will end up with the short end of the stick.

Men tend to understand this, and when men had political clout they crafted a compromise whereby the majority of men, who had no desire to devote their lives entirely to work, were compensated fairly for their time. Women’s liberation played a big part in destroying this compromise, but it’s gone even farther now. As more young men are dropping out of contention, discouraged by the enormous pressures of modern family life and the puny to nonexistent rewards most get for sacrificing themselves to a company, companies are pushing women to take their place. Rather than a triumphant movement toward equality, it smells of desperation to me: if you can’t find enough boys to be suckers for “the man” you turn to the women.

Sheryl Sandberg is a taskmaster who drives her underlings to great sacrifice through manipulation, ambiguous promises and poorly defined ideals. She’s the kind of boss who’d be perfectly happy if her female workers gave her their entire reproductive lives, only to end up desperate and childless in middle age. For all the anger some conservatives display toward players and PUAs, these guys are only taking advantage of a situation they didn’t create or ask for, but these same middle-class conservatives who hate players, by encouraging their daughters to get on the career track right out of high school, frequently push their daughters right into the arms of a corporate surrogate husband, all but guaranteeing they’ll have a fruitless sex life during their prime reproductive years.

In the end, the feminist demands about the workplace are just a reaction to their greatly diminished status as women. They’ve sold their femininity for a paycheck, and in most cases a pretty meager one. It’s going to be a bitter harvest in coming years for many, many women, and the new, “empowered” feminism of the corporate world is largely responsible for creating this problem.

LifeLongAtheist #conspiracy patheos.com

Ok, I'll bite. The most convincing fascist? Shillary Clinton. She actually has the Left believing that she stands for the Left in economic areas... she will do exactly as she has done here entire career... whatever the coporatist fat-cats on Wall Street tell her to.

How the parties are the same:
1. Both support these endless wars of the last few decades.
2. Both Rs and Ds spend money like it grows in the grass.
3. Both ignore basic human rights (I.E. the right has it out for gays etc, on the other side Obama is happy to murder un-tried Americans with drone strikes).
4. Neither really respects the law. I mean, Gitmo is still open.
5. They are both self-interested in winning not on merit or argument but just to win to get their 'tribe' to the top. The issues DO NOT matter to these politicians, only winning the game does.
6. Both are bought and paid for by big business. We should make politicians wear sponsors like race car drivers.
7. Both parties expand government without real systems for paying for it.

I could go on and on...

various MRAs #sexist reddit.com

Re: Karen Straughan on why Mens Rights is so difficult.

(DavidByron2)
You need to have a minimal amount of sympathy for a protest to work and men don't have it. It's the same as you wouldn't try to hold a rally for the rights of rapists or pedophiles and expect much good from it. Well feminism has made men about as sympathetic as rapists and pedophiles and often identified all men as rapists and pedophiles.

Another analogy would be like getting Jews to hold a big rally in Nazi Germany. It would be seen as disgusting and it would be attacked as dangerous.

(biscuitgravy)
The problem is exacerbated by the fact that men don't even have sympathy for themselves. Men are the most effective and motivated haters and killers of men. That subverts all of the traditional self-interest routes to popular organization.

The only thing that makes a regular guy organize with MRAs is total alienation by a gynocentric society. Not even facing death will make him leave gynocentrism in some cases. Guys volunteer to die all the time to protect a woman's honor. They have to meet with something totally intolerable. Something much greater than themselves, to even think of addressing their own problems. Usually, it's their children. But Feminists have secured the right to those as well.

(tenchineuro)

It's why when we approach the mainstream, we have to frame a LOT of men's rights issues in terms of how helping men helps women and children, or society, rather than how we should be helping men for their own sake. Convince people that men are utilities who should be cared for and maintained so they can and are willing continue to be of use

This is how we got where we are now, by being of use and not people in our own right. Men are tools, not human beings, I won't agree with that and that approach won't get men treated as anything but tools.

I have a great deal of respect for Karen, but I think she's off the beam with this.

(0x123d)

why no disobedience

Because we have jobs.

why is MRA so unpalatable

Because of how our species evolved. Girls > women > boys > pets > inanimate objects > men.Because of how our species evolved. Girls > women > boys > pets > inanimate objects > men.

(Elvick)
Think it's more women > girls > pets > boys > objects > men

With an argument that objects could come before boys even. And depending on the age range we're talking for "boy" it's as easy as domestic violence shelters turning away boys of a certain age because they could be "dangerous".

Women can make more children. Nature didn't guarantee girls would make it to child bearing years. So women were more valuable than girls. Women having more children was a more reasonable assumption than girls not dying from disease. It made sense.

Hell, vagina monologues has the rape of a 13 year old girl by a 20-something year old woman who plies the barely teenager with alcohol. And it's lauded as some great feminist text. A certain vile celebrity whose name I won't utter, molested her sister for years and she still has a career in Hollywood. The internet hates her, and rightfully spreads the information every time she's given a platform somewhere. But it hardly undoes anything.

Probably more examples. But women are definitely placed above even girls.

(mwobuddy)
There's actually a few reasons why its so difficult and its easy to sum up.

Conflation. "oh, so you're against women"? A typical argument.

Denial. "you think men don't have equal rights or protection in law, that's cute".

imprecise language. "you think there is no rape culture but I know plenty of women who've been raped". Both can be true, but rape culture is proven by "rape victims" while your definition of rape culture is "a culture that tells people explicitly to go out and rape women". Imprecise language is a problem for all sides in any argument, and is perhaps the most important issue. Its why you absolutely need to ask someone to declare specifically what they mean when they use a term or a phrase. You may be accused of pedantry, but this is often a tactic of obfuscation to say your side is inherently illegitimate.

These three are used in a motte and bailey tactic of every single men's rights debate.

(Wisemanner)
I think carefully thought out resistance to the system will have an effect, and there is some evidence that this is increasing; examples being men refusing to go to the aid of women; MGTOW; and men refusing to marry.

I would suggest at least the following be practised.

Pay as little tax as possible. Most tax is spent on women, with, in the UK, about twice as much spent on women's healthcare, and three times as much spend on research into their cancers. (Even though women live longer.)

Do not go to the aid of women, The police will arrest you in an instant if there is any mistake or confusion.

Do not help the police except where you are actually helping another male or yourself. These are, after all, the enablers and helpers of feminism, and the thugs who hammer a man's door at six am simply on the word of a woman.

Do not marry. The whole system is rigged to get the husband to pay the living expenses of the wife even when she no longer wants to have anything to do with him.

5.Do not vote Socialist in the UK. The other parties are not much better, but the Labour Party is feminist-infested.

There is almost certainly much more.

(lacandib)
The civil disobedience/protest route could work but it would have to led by women.

(The_Best_01)

Why?

Because evidently, society listens more to women. In the best-case scenario, it would be led by men and women.

(Elvick)
Because men are viewed as dangerous in those circumstances... look at the arguments against men's spaces and clubs. It's always about how it's dangerous. And that's just a private space or a club on campus.

An entire protest filled of men wouldn't go over any differently. Did you even read Karen's comment? She talks about how society views men as dangerous in there.

bgates276 #sexist futuretimeline.net

Maybe you want to side with women, because you think it gives you brownie points with them. Unfortunately, a woman is NEVER on a man's side. Simply put, they think totally different from men. Women have different brains. For a woman, a man is simply a means to an end. Maybe you are young, maybe you think you are special, and maybe you want to believe in them. Unfortunately, if a man's relationship ever conflicts with her self-interest, she will betray you too.


Now you say 'Not all women are like that', and maybe there is a bit of variation, but their nature is basically all the same. I honestly think it has to do with the XX chromosome. It's like none of them differentiate or expand into adulthood, like men do. It's almost like they contract instead. I'm not complaining about it. It's just evolutionary forces at work, and being childlike is actually advantageous if you are raising them. However, given the current framework, where relationships are based on love and equality, getting involved with them is a bad idea, because a man can sacrifice his whole life for her, only to find out that she didn't really love him, despite repeatedly saying so otherwise. You find out the whole thing was just an act.


You'd be surprised at how easy it is for a woman to move on from a relationship, completely cutting all contact off and never looking back, even if a man has invested his emotions or financial resources in her for years. Don't say I didn't warn you. You can feel like she took a part of you that you will never get back. This is the point at which men become bitter and indifferent to them.

Bill Ryan and Kerry Cassidy #ufo #conspiracy #crackpot projectcamelot.org

Mission Statement

Overview and mission statement:

• To provide researchers, activists and ‘whistleblowers’ with access to all forms of media in order to get the truth out.

• Our focus includes but is not limited to the following:
• extraterrestrial visitation and contact
• time travel
• mind control
• classified advanced technology
• free energy
• possible coming earth changes
• revealing plans that exist to control the human race.

• To establish ‘safety in numbers’ and unite these disparate factions under an umbrella of protection for activists and ‘whistleblowers’ who may have concerns for the safety of themselves and their loved ones.

• To provide a tribute to all activists in paradigm-challenging fields who have worked for the benefit of humanity... and who have suffered or been silenced for speaking the truth.

________________

In Tribute:

• Many courageous, free-thinking individuals have suffered for their commitment to help humanity.

• We honor them here, and offer protection and support for those who follow in their path.

• We are dedicated to getting the truth out.

• Click here for our Tribute Page in which we honor a number of exceptional men and women who have paid the highest price for speaking the truth.

________________

Project Camelot...

• Enables activists in paradigm-challenging fields to make a firm statement about their work, their intentions, and their positive state of mind.

• Provides access to all forms of media. The objective is to get the truth out... and facilitate appropriate, secure publicity for all those with information to share, but who fear reprisals for their stand.

________________

We shall prevail.

Being of sound mind, heart and spirit, we each declare the following to be true:

• We have no intention of ending our own lives.

• We will not tolerate suppression of our truths, our ideas, our freedoms, or our work.

• We stand together to support others in the expression of truths and freedom to speak out... no matter how radical those ideas may seem.

• Standing for freedom takes courage; together we shall be strong in the face of all odds.

• If it is ever claimed that we have committed suicide, disappeared, been institutionalized, or sold out financially or in any other way to self-interested factions, we declare those claims false and fabricated.

• We testify, assert and affirm without reservation, on behalf of all those who have dedicated their lives to the ending of secrecy and the promotion of freedom of thought, ideas and expression... that we shall prevail.

CH #sexist heartiste.wordpress.com

[Just declare women to be sex slaves and be done with the whole Vaginal-American Labor Embargo dance already]

I added this earlier to a recently published post, but I figured it deserved its own headlining.

***

A big reason why we have an epidemic of overeducated women tragically delaying marriage and childbirth until it’s too late is because of the reality of female hypergamy. When women gain economic, occupational and social status, their mate criteria rise commensurate to the rise in their self-perceived (or more precisely, their self-wished) SMV. The tragedy is that their high SMV left them in their youth.

Female hypergamy, economic empowerment, credentialism, and psychological projection are a toxic anti-natal stew.

Various Incels #sexist incels.co

(Rassimov)

[Blackpill] Feminists now openly embracing the PATRIARCHY, ded srs

Female friends at FDS are now openly rejecting equality between the sexes in favor of a patriarchal model and even suggesting to split the bill on a date should be a immediate diqualifier. Strong independent women now expect old fashioned chivalry, admitting that the third world, unlike cucked northern Europe, is actually more sane when it comes dating, since the role of a man is expected to be that of a protector and provider, otherwise he is low value.

image

Remember, most of the world is pro-FDS The haters complaining about female dating strategy methods are all from the Anglosphere or Europe, and/or cannot afford to date. Don't forget, the vast majority of the world is structured in such a way where it is a given that the man is the provider and pursuer in the relationship. And this is not a new phenomenon, this has been the case for thousands of years, as women have always been the prize-for our femininity, ability to bear children, cleverness, the joy we bring to a household, our mothering skills, our homemaking, our diplomacy, fostering community relations, our beauty, our intelligence, our strength, and so on. Men, who do not carry children for nine months nor breastfeed, historically took on the role of providing resources so

image

The so-called "50-50" started with the completely shitty argument of "well you wanted equality, didn't you?" Women wanted equal civil rights, not a situation where the man objectively benefits even more than before.

tl;dr: In the olden times the alpha leader got to fuck all the women; in modern times women get to fuck the alpha leader.

(TheBasedCel)

In patriarchy men are viewed as expendible, this is why you should join my neo-patriarchy where the man is at the top.

(yeshuallah)

That's their endgame, to return to the bleak period of humankind's history when only few males reproduced.

(Rassimov)

A lot of tradcels here simply cannot understand that polygamy, not monogamy, is the defining feature of a patriarchal society.

(Cybersex is our hope)

Yes. Many don't Want to understand that women just go from feminists to traditionalists and viceversa to get the highest benefits from men. Femininity is the problem, not feminism. Women never gave a shit about principles. They only care about pragmatic self interests and many radfems will simply transition to trad con as chameleons as soon as the new right wing order replaces leftism in the western world. Many tradcels idiots will fall for the trap and start attacking fellowcels. JFL at thinking foids would have waged war against us with a sword and ready to fight like the disposable sex fights

(based_meme)

JFL if you don't think these are post wall roasties virtue signalling to ensare a dumb betabuxx.

Yeah, fool the idiot into thinking he's valued, so you can leech off of him while getting dicked by chads and tyrones on the side.

Kill yourselves, you fucking cunts.

Edmund_Kemper #wingnut incels.co

[Venting] Bluepilled cucks like IT, white knights, feminazis, normies, etc. are just NPCs who only agree with whatever society says

they all think of themselves as free-thinkers, but they aren't even remotely free-thinkers. they are cowardly faggots who don't have the balls to think for themselves. they think they accept homos and trannies because "it's the right to do" when in reality they only accept them because they're forced to accept them by society. they think women are equal to men because society forces them to think that. they think incels are bad because society forces them to think that. they think attraction to anyone under 18 (or under 21) is pedophilia because society teaches them that and will crucify you if you disagree. they think that curries have just as much SMV as caucasians because they're taught if you disagree you're an evil racist who should be killed. these people only think these things because society teaches them to think these things.

if these faggots lived in the 1950s, they would've HATED gay people and trans people. only a tiny minority of americans back then thought homosexuality was acceptable and if they think they're part of that 1% from back then who would've accepted homos then they're unrealistic retards. In 1958, only 4% of americans approved of interracial marriage. if they lived back then, they would've HATED interacial marriage. they cannot seriously think they'd be part of that 4%. if they lived in the antebellum era, they would've HATED black people and would've had a racial bias against them. if they lived in ancient greece, they wouldn't have any problem with a 30 year old man marrying a 15 yr old foid and most likely would've married a 15 yr old at age 30 if they were male or married a 30 yr old man if they were female.

if they lived in a world where bestiality was accepted, they would accept bestiality and wouldn't wanna be called an evil bestialiphobe by SJWs. if they lived in a world where incest (without pregnancy) was accepted, they would accept it. if they lived in a world where polygamy was normal, they'd accept polygamy. if they lived in nazi germany, only 1% of them would be brave enough to resist hitler. people who think they would've resisted hitler are unrealistic. people who think they'd resist kim-jong-un are unrealistic.

then they see us disagreeing with what society says and they feel threatened. this is why they hate the blackpill and promote the bluepill. they think we live in a fair world where a deformed curry manlet can get a gigastacy

AccountError #racist #psycho incels.co

[Serious] People give ER shit for false reasons

From reading My Twisted World, it is very apparent that alot of the shit that's used against him is false. He was never the rich person people claim he was, his father was facing a financial crisis and Elliot only had a few thousand in the bank, which is practically nothing. He might've had a BMW, but that's it, there really was nothing else going for him in terms of wealth.

Elliot did not exclusively want a blonde stacy gf, he had multiple points of interests in other type of foids. The quotes about him wanting a blonde stacy are just projections of the perfect women, he legit didn't have 2/10 foids asking him out, if they did he wouldn't have gone ER.

And speaking of asking out, Elliot mostly gets shit for not asking a foid out. It sounds legitimate at first, but let's be real, Elliot knew the signs women gave him. Most blackpilled users will understand women will give non- verbal cues to signal that don't want to talk to you or even have any interaction. It would not be a stretch to say that ER picked up on these as even a bluepill simp can.

Lastly, Elliot isn't handsome. He was short for his area, hapa, small frame and big lips. It is delusional to think that women would find him attractive, let alone in an area full of Cali chads. JFL

Incels Wiki #racist #sexist incels.wiki

Anglo girls

Anglo girls are amongst the worst girls on the planet. Essentially every common characteristic attributed to American women within the Manosphere can also be applied to Anglo girls.

Cluster-B

They generally have a highly anti-social, narcissistic and rude attitude and seem to speak in a language composed entirely of sarcasm, pop culture references and shit tests. The majority follow the American model of riding the Cock Carousel through their teens and twenties, before settling down with a Beta male once they hit the wall. A lot of Anglo girls lose their virginity in their early teen years before hitting sixteen.

Particularly Promiscuous

In particular, according to a survey conducted by the condom manufacturer Durex, women from New Zealand are the most promiscuous in the world with an average of 20.4 sexual partners, compared to men from New Zealand averaging just 16.8. (It is important to note, women have been demonstrated to lie about their number of sexual partners, even in anonymous surveys, thus this is most likely an underestimate.) [1] Thus it appears that they are not only the most promiscuous, but among the most prone to hypergamy to boot.

The thirst of most of the men in the Anglosphere means that any girl who slim is viewed as 'fit' and she will be guaranteed to have an army of thirsty orbiters fawning over her. This thirst causes even the most fat, unattractive women to believe that they are entitled to a high sexual market value man.

Particularly Feminist

Women in the Anglosphere typically hold strong feminist attitudes even if they refuse to use the label, and are successful in enforcing their demands on the men of the Anglosphere (typically bluepilled simps); for example Canada is apparently "the vasectomy capital of the world" [2] where "more women here (Canada) rely on male sterilization for contraception than in any other country surveyed."

Women in the Anglosphere, particularly Australian women are also notorious for their uncouth behavior, which includes a tendency for public drunkenness and urination.

Cock Carousel

Women now outnumber men at British universities, and spend their time of 'self realization' riding the cock carousel with the bad boys on campus, wasting taxpayer money studying useless social science degrees, before either ending up in a dead end office job and finding a Captain Save A Ho to bail them out, or becoming a career focused, strong independent woman, unable to hold down a stable relationship post wall, which leads to them becoming unhappy spinsters who have missed their ability to fulfill their biological imperative of having a family.

For example, Australian women have the oldest age at first birth (if they deign to have any children at all) at 30.5 years old[3] with the U.K close behind (30) which will surely result in skyrocketing rates of autism in those countries, resulting in a large pool of likely incels being created.[4]

References

[1] http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/22444/Kiwi-women-most-promiscuous-in-the-world
[2] https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/are-we-blushing-yet/
[3] https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/People/Mother%27s-mean-age-at-first-birth
[4] https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill#44.6.25_of_high_functioning_adult_autistic_men_remain_virgins.2C_despite_high_sex.2Frelationship_drive

See Also

* femoid
* iceland

N-Digger incels.co

Why normal people hate incels

People on this site often say that normal people hate incels because they are simply ugly, short and *insert bad genetic trait here*. However I believe that in addition to that normies had us because we shatter their ego and their self-worth. The reason for this is that normies believe in the just-world fallacy, and that all the good things in life that they posses they have because they are such a great person and that they put in hard work. When and incel comes around and says, "I have a hard life because of factors outside of my control, life isn't fair", normies react with hostility because it suggests that maybe all the good things THEY have are not a result of their efforts and hard work but from traits they were born with. They seriously believe that getting what you want in life is really easy (because it was for them) and that if you don't have a good life you're lazy and stupid because it's so easy to achieve, right?

TL;DR - WATER IS WET

dsar9012 #sexist sluthate.com

MGTOWs are destroying the roasties and cuck on /pol/
I noticed on /pol/ recently (at 4chan not 8chan), there are more and more guys who are going MGTOW and are even blacpilled incels who are going their own way (like me). Great news, since /pol/ is very influence, far more so than pretty much any subreddit and far more than Sluthate or any other incel site.

With luck the number of blackpilled men who are incel or MGTOW and know the truth about women will accelerate, as social media has allowed women to show their true nature and completely destroyed blupilled ideology that women want nice, caring guys. And completely destroyed cuckservative ideology that guys should just get married and start a family with some thot who can accuse you of rape with no proof and get you sent to prison for years, or fuck outside the marriage, get knocked up and then ask the husband to pay child support for a kid that isn't even his for 18 years.

Soon these feminist and cuckservative pussy worshipping SIMPS will run out of bluepilled cucks to exploit. Soon being MGTOW or incel will be a point of PRIDE (it already is for me) rather than targets of derision and degradation as they are for so much of modern, liberal, feminist, western, multicultural society. LONG LIVE MGTOW!! And also blackpilled incels who are spreading the truth about bitches, you just need to swallow the final blackpill that getting married/dating women is not worth it in the long run, especially if you're an omega male who women don't like.

Bluestarcinema #racist youtube.com

Only a nasty, low-class slankedy whore would let a sub-human ape have sex with them. Hopefully they get vaginal cancer or AIDS and they will eventually. The only white girls that date nasty niggers have mental problems or are drug addicted bottom-of-the-barrel filth and lose all worth. Low self esteem plays a major role in this aswell. I seen a white girl the? other day with an ape & I told her right in front of her pet monkey what a nasty low-class skank she was.

Kai Peter Chang #sexist quora.com

World Wide Web: What is it like being a man on a dating site?

World Wide Web: What is it like being a man on a dating site?
Follow-up on What is it like being a woman on a dating site?
32 ANSWERS
Kai Peter Chang
Kai Peter Chang, Thief of Hearts
Updated Jan 3, 2016
Online dating is perfectly symbolized by the very act of sex and fertilization itself: - one egg surrounded by millions of furiously squirming sperm all trying to get in. Nearly every sperm will die trying, with the exception of the lucky one whose combination of attributes (strength & stamina) and starting position happen to connect with the egg.

Great deal for the egg, lousy deal for the individual sperm.

But don't take my word for it.

Someone actually RAN a multi-month experiment on this very subject matter with a spread of fake profiles, male and female of varying levels of physical attractiveness. The results were as expected, but very shocking for those who are unfamiliar with the world of hot women and female hypergamy.

Original Post on the experiment:
http://jonmillward.com/blog/attr...

Sharply-worded commentary by a pickup blog on the results:
http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2...

TL;DR: A man in the top 5 percentile of looks will pull less interest than a Plain Jane middle-of-the-distribution female, and for guys who do NOT cut model-level cheekbones and 6'0+ height, the statistics are far grimmer.


?

Excerpt:

As we can see, the two hottest girls are cleaning up in the attention sweepstakes. The two hottest men get a few bites, but because they are men and have no personal concept of the sheer volume of sexual attention that hot women experience during their brief window of prime fertility, they think they are Kings of Maine.
Handsome Joe: “Hey, Emma, I got eight messages this week! I’m in demand!”
Exquisite Emma: “Oh, uh, hee hee… that’s great Joe!”
Handsome Joe: “How many did you get?”
Exquisite Emma: “128.”
Handsome Joe:

?

...

This is not to say that women don’t care about looks; only that women compartmentalize looks along with other, less physically tangible male characteristics that they are subconsciously attracted to in men. Less facially gifted men with game should be heartened by these online results: they show that a tight email message that exhibits the qualities of the preselected alpha male can draw the interest of cute girls who might otherwise dismiss these men based solely on their photos.

==================

Andrew Ross Long is correct that a man who desires a nonzero results from dating websites must invest substantial time for even modest replies. The promise that online dating would help you "save time" by helping you connect with thousands of local singles is an illusion, an illusion sold to introverted nerds eager to buy the notion that they can insulate themselves the terrifying task of approaching a woman they find desirable in person and risk rejection.

Any women you may find desirable online is likely bombarded by thousands of other suitors JUST LIKE YOU making similar approaches, and your message sits aside thousands of others like it in her inbox. She cannot date all of them, and it is almost certain you are not the tallest, smartest, funniest or most-accomplished guy who approaches her.

At 6'0 and (I hope) a reasonably well-written profile, including a full spread of photos (with the year they were taken so it's clear I'm not banking on an old perfectly shot image) and here are my stats:
* three to four visitors a week on average
* one or two incoming messages every six months
* historically, 100% of my girlfriend/long-term-dating relationships came from live pulls (met at a mutual friend's party, conference, grocery store, nonprofit fundraiser gala, etc.)

If you are shorter than me (which 95% of men are), have more blandly-written/ boring profile, I imagine you'd get even worse response rates.

Overall conclusion: ROI for men on dating sites is TERRIBLE.


BONUS ADVICE:

For most men, those hours spent browsing profiles and sending witty messages could be far better spent volunteering at a local nonprofit (which skew strongly toward female staff & volunteers anyway). There, you actions will be helping their the local community you live in while meeting other charitably-minded females in a relaxed, non-sexually-charged environment.

Teach a group of underprivileged kids a new skill, organize a blood drive (disclosure: I volunteer at the Red Cross so I am biased), lead a fundraiser on behalf of a battered women's shelter, tutor recent immigrants English so they can seize better opportunities.

Any of these activities puts you in the midst of good, wholesome women and allows introverts to comfortably get to know women as people, not sexual prospects jostling alongside other more aggressive men who see them as mating rivals.

The world needs men who step up and in so doing, you end up on the radar of women who may have never given your dating profile a second glance. but, having seen the good you do with their own eyes, desire you because in her view, you are a MAN who is a caring pillar of the community and a good prospective partner.

A win-win for all, I think. Certainly a far better ROI than messaging women OKCupid who will, statistically, never get back to you.

Incel Wiki #sexist incels.wiki

Marriage

?Marriage in the modern Western context is a system of legalized prostitution by which a man bribes a woman (with food during dating, resource security, emotional security, amazing sex, never losing his job, free transportation, an expensive ring, enduring a lavish wedding, and often a place to stay) to let him have regular sexual intimacy and to know who his children are through institutionalized long term monogamy. This description of marriage does not constitute all that that women may be entitled to in a marriage, but it does constitute the most a man is expected to receive. The symbol of marriage is a man going down on one knee offering an expensive diamond ring to the woman. There is a reason why women hate to be the ones to propose like this, because most of the barter is supposed to be on the male side.

Even if there is 50/50 shared parenting and the mother works, it is still a bribe, as the condition of a stable marriage is only the man keeping his job, not the woman. As the National Parent's Organization says, "The key factor in the decision to divorce is whether Hubby (note, not the wife) has a job. If he doesn’t, even if his job loss is involuntary, his odds of being ditched by his wife skyrocket."[1]

Marriage has some benefit to men over non-institutionalized long-term sexual bribery as men lose interest in a partner much slower than women and cannot find sex outside of long term relationships as easy as women. This does not mean that women don't enjoy long term monogamous relationships or that men should bribe women for long term monogamous relationships.

Men who see modern marriage as a scam in favor of women have started a number of social movements including the Father's Rights Movement and MGTOW.


Divorce
Women initiate over 75% of the divorces explicitly, and probably over 85% implicitly. Your tax dollars then go toward subsidies for single motherhood, and often the state makes the dad pay the woman after she divorces him. The process of women marrying men, and then divorcing him for no good reason and collecting child support/alimony is also known as divorce rape. Women often say this is justified as boomer men cheat about 5% more than boomer women, but with the rise of female hypergamy, Tinder, other online dating, and social media, younger married women of the millennial generation are cheating more than men[2]. Feminist magazine babe.net, celebrated that younger women are now cheating more than men with their article, "Women hate monogamy even more than men do, vindicating empowered hoes everywhere."[3]

Move Toward Polyamory with Rise in Divorce
With divorces and broken families rising exponentially and marriages decreasing since feminism and the decline of the family with industrialization.[4], women tout polyandry as a solution to inceldom and general male loneliness.

The only problem is that in short-term, high-friction polyamory in a free sexual market is that incels are inevitable without a specific social or government program to address inceldom. The growing pool of incels during a rise of polyamory always ends ultimately in societal polygyny, no matter how many women believe they are practicing polyandry instead. Many people are concerned about the rise of short-term polyamory with the disintegration of marriage, and propose enforced monogamy as a solution including NKL and Jordan Peterson.

Lookismisreal #sexist incel.life

There is no denying that feminism has radically altered western civilization in the latter half of the twentieth century. No other social justice movement was ever able to make such a massive impact in social morals and attitudes; feminism, however, was able to make such profound changes. Femoid sexual revolution and liberation was one of the biggest things feminists were able to achieve as they freed sexual relations from the constraints that they were associated with; traditional Christian values.

Now with morals and values being completely out of the window, degeneracy has allowed to run rampant in every corner of the western culture. A good example for this is how monogamy is slowly fading away from peoples lives as polyamory has become to be the new "cool" thing. Feminist are now using their influence in the mass media to promote polyamory and cuckoldry as they deem it to be "progressive". Marriage is without a doubt also nonexistent, and a quick glance at the divorce rates can further solidify this statement. Due to this, the nuclear family no longer exists in this degenerate western culture as family ties have massively weakened. Which is not surprising due to the fact that feminists have always wanted to abolish traditional gender roles and destroy the longstanding family unit.

Feminists have also successfully indoctrinated impressionable young femoids to being degenerate promiscuous sluts from a very young age. Now, every femoids can easily involve themselves in rampant promiscuous activities without facing any consequence since slut shaming is discouraged and looked down upon. Let's also not forget how these feminist cum dumpsters have forced us to accept people with the mental illness called "gender dysphoria" and imposed "gender neutral" language on everyone and would deem someone homophobic or a transphobic person if they don't use the correct term.

Unfortunately, feminism is now leaking outside of the western civilization -- actively trying hard to establish itself in other cultures. Countries that had morals and values are slowly facing oblivion as feminism reaches out and corrupts them. If this continues it won't be long where bitches will start to demand more and more rights (even though they currently have more rights than men) and start to control how society functions. Considering how these cunts are never satisfied with what they've got, it's sad to say that this is will be a issue that society will face as a whole in the coming future. Unless, Islam saves us; which is of course, our only hope against the feminist cunts.

Philosophycel #dunning-kruger incels.co

On Incels Using and Abusing Culture

Incels become more introspective and intelligent than normies on average because the obstacles they come up against demand self-awareness and critical thinking, and when they find they cannot act in the outside world, they retreat into an inner-world of their own making. In cultivating these qualities, they open themselves up to indulgence in culture. Many incels have pretensions to culture, for example, reading Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, reading 'good books', watching 'good TV' and playing 'good videogames', and so on. It is common for incels to accuse normies of lacking introspection, intelligence and a sense of culture by the same measure. While these accusations have merit, we ought to look at why they're being made in the majority of cases. Indeed, it is uncommon for incels to accuse other incels of lacking these qualities, so what is it about normies that calls for critique?

Ultimately, many incels of this nature identify themselves with a higher order, proclaiming themselves above normies and their interests, and therefore looking down on them. They use this in order to comfort themselves by imagining they're too sophisticated to enjoy associating with normies, so thereby they will be isolated by society at large, but critically more self-isolated than before, isolated by choice, voluntarily isolated, and often they will strike out against normie preoccupations from the shadows, like popular videogames, movies, etc. Though the incels genuinely feel as though what normies like is all shit, and perhaps they are right, they anchor themselves to this role in order to make themselves superior to normies, look down on them, and reject them. This is essentially a small incel rebellion as I have envisioned it in my post history. It is an inversion of values that makes out qualities associated with strength and action as crude and cumbersome, while qualities associated with weakness and inaction are made subtle and intelligent. Although the pathology of these incels is that they only integrate themselves with culture to the extent that it allows them to be destructive towards 'the common'. They do not spend their time delving into the intricacies of culture and finding joy in it, and it does not invigorate their activity; it only enables them to tear down the cultural interests of successful and normal people out of pure resentment towards a world and its people that has not answered to their desires, so now they seek revenge against it and those who they're envious of. Many incels who think of themselves as cultured are actually not very cultured for this reason, they're only interested in using culture as a sword and shield.

TL;DR: Many incels become somewhat cultured to cope with not being successful in an 'uncultured world' so they can look down on it and regular people. They use their cultured sensibilities to snobbishly tear down happier and more successful people and their interests because they're resentful towards the world because it hasn't answered to their desires, and they're jealous of many uncultured people for being able to act in the world in ways they've failed to do. Incels enshrine contemplation because they cannot act.

Deutsches Rechtsbüro #wingnut #racist verfassungsschutz.brandenburg.de

Far-Right “Legal Consultant”

The office of the “Deutsches Rechtsbüro”1, founded in Aprill 1992, could originally be contacted through a post-office box in Hamburg. Its leader at the time was a Hamburg lawyer. In the mid-Eighties, she was considered the main activist of the Bund Heimattreuer Jugend2 and worked for many years in the law firm of the still active right-wing extremist Jürgen Rieger.

The DRB sends its members court decisions from its own archive and brokers lawyers for checking the legality of printed material and other legal advice. Furthermore, it conducts legal training seminars. According to its own self-conception, the DRB is “a coalition of legal experts and people interested in legal matters who would like to pass on their knowledge” and “a self-help group for the preservation of rights, particularly fundamental rights”.

”True-hearted3 Max”

The early days of the DRB saw the creation of the first “Max Trueheart” brochures, which remain the core of the DRB's public work to this day. The premise is always the same: The fictional Max comes into conflict with the law, and his example is used to demonstrate the steps that need to be taken to avoid culpability for far-right activities. From the long list of topics: “Max and the Foreigners” on the topic of incitement of hatred (§ 130 Criminal Code), “Max and the State of Injustice” on the topic of defamation of the state and its symbols (§§ 90, 90a CC), “Max and the Planes” on the topic of unconstitutional propaganda material and symbols (§§ 86, 86a CC), as well as “Max and the Music” on the topic on media harmful to young persons (§27 Youth Protection Code).

Networking, not legal advice

Currently, the DRB is situated in Birkenwerder near Oranienburg. On the office's web site, Richard Miosga is named as contact person. Miosga is not a legal expert. Rather, what qualifies him for his elevated position in the DRB would be his manifold contacts collected over the course of hiBerlin House of Representatives. Afterwards, he was active in the Hoffman von Fallersleben Training Institute, in the far-right “Prussia Culture Society of Berlin” and in the party “the Nationals”, to name just a few stations in his activism. Together with the leader of the now-disbanded Märkischer Heimatschutz (MHS)4, Gordon Reinholz, he spoke on conferences, and he campaigned as a candidate for the NPD for Berlin-Tempelhof in the 2015 Bundestag election.

Through his biography, Miosga is an example for the true intentions of the Rechtsbüro: Only for the sake of appearance do they put their focus on the “preservation of fundamental rights”. In truth, however, the DRB is more concerned with networking right-wing extremists of all factions, from party members to the neo-Nazi “Independent forces”.

1 “German Legal Office”
2 “Union of Youths Loyal to the Homeland”, a neonazi youth organisation, successor of the Wiking Youth, banned in 2009
3 literally “loyal-hearted”. It's actually an archaic term for naïve.
4 “Homeland Protection of the March”, a Brandenburg (originally a margraviate) network of Kameradschaften (loosely organised neonazi cells)

Original GermanRechtsextremistische „Rechtsberatung"

Das Büro des im April 1992 gegründeten „Deutschen Rechtsbüros" (DRB) war anfangs über ein Postfach in Hamburg zu erreichen. Leiterin war damals eine Hamburger Rechtsanwältin. Sie galt Mitte der achtziger Jahre als Hauptaktivistin des Bundes Heimattreuer Jugend und arbeitete mehrere Jahre in der Rechtsanwaltskanzlei des heute noch aktiven Rechtsextremisten Jürgen Rieger.

Das DRB sendet seinen Mitgliedern Urteile aus einem eigenem Urteilsarchiv zu und vermittelt Rechtsanwälte für die Überprüfung der Strafbarkeit von Druckwerken und sonstige Rechtsauskünfte. Weiterhin führt es juristische Schulungen durch. Nach eigenem Selbstverständnis ist das DRB „ein Zusammenschluss von Juristen und juristisch interessierten Personen, die ihr Wissen gern weitergeben möchten", und „eine Selbsthilfegruppe zur Wahrung der Rechte, insbesondere der Grundrechte".

„Treuherziges Mäxchen"

In der Anfangszeit des DRB entstanden die ersten Broschüren unter dem Titel „Mäxchen Treuherz", die bis heute den Kern der Öffentlichkeitsarbeit des DRB darstellen. Das Konzept ist immer das Gleiche: Die Phantasiefigur Mäxchen gerät mit dem Gesetz in Konflikt und an seinem Beispiel wird exemplarisch vorexerziert, welche juristischen Schritte zu gehen seien, um eine Strafbarkeit rechtsextremistischer Handlungen auszuschließen. Aus der langen Themenliste: „Mäxchen und die Ausländer" zum Stichwort Volksverhetzung (§ 130 StGB), „Mäxchen und der Unrechtsstaat" zum Stichwort Verunglimpfung des Staates und seiner Symbole (§§ 90, 90a StGB), „Mäxchen und die Flugzeuge" zum Stichwort Verfassungswidrige Propagandamittel und Kennzeichen (§§ 86, 86 a StGB), sowie „Mäxchen und die Musik" zum Stichwort Jugendgefährdende Medien (§ 27 JuSchG).

Netzwerk statt Rechtsbeistand

Seinen Sitz hat das DRB mittlerweile in Birkenwerder bei Oranienburg. Auf der Webseite des Büros wird Richard Miosga als Ansprechpartner benannt. Miosaga ist kein Jurist. Was ihn für seine hervorgehobene Rolle beim DRB qualifiziert, sind wohl eher seine mannigfaltigen Kontakte, die er im Laufe seiner rechtsextremistischen „Karriere" gesammelt hat. So war Miosga von 1989 bis 1990 stellvertretender Fraktionsvorsitzender der Republikaner (REP) im Berliner Abgeordnetenhaus. Anschließend wirkte er im Hoffman-von-Fallersleben-Bildungswerk, in der ebenfalls rechtsextremistischen „Berliner Kulturgemeinschaft Preußen" und in der Partei „Die Nationalen", um nur einige Stationen seines Engagements zu benennen. Er trat zusammen mit dem Anführer des mittlerweile aufgelösten Märkischen Heimatschutzes (MHS), Gordon Reinholz, auf Tagungen auf und kandidierte bei der Bundestagswahl 2005 in Berlin-Tempelhof für die NPD.

Miosga ist mit dieser Biographie ein Beispiel dafür, wie die wahren Interessen des Rechtsbüros aussehen: Nur zum Schein stellt es die „Wahrung der Grundrechte" in den Vordergrund. Es geht aber dem DRB vielmehr um die Vernetzung von Rechtsextremisten aller Lager, vom parteilich Gebundenen bis zu den neonazistischen „Freien Kräften".

fellofix #sexist incels.co

Women trying to be political is like fish trying to swim in a thick jelly-like substance. Why is this?

Women can not say true to their political beliefs, and are automatically biased, even more so than most men could ever be. Let's take democracy, government by the people and for the people, where the popular candidate wins. Women may initially look at this concept, and say "sure, this is good". But their tone will quickly chance when the people elect a 4/10, instead of the competing 7/10 candidate.

Women can not be of any political orientation, belief or ideology, because they will always trade their own values for Chad cock. Nationalist women are quick to give up their self-proclaimed "respect for the father/motherland", if this means selection by high SMV men. Overtly globalist, feminist and "liberal" women, the so-called "SJWs" will stop complaining about "oppression", "discrimination" and all perceived unjusts, if they would be chosen by a 6'5 with 9/10 face and a body of a Greek God.

TL;DR Women will always betray their politics when Chad comes into the picture.

Various incels #sexist incels.co

All foids are the same -megathread

(RemoveNormalfags)
Isn't it crazy, how all foids are mindless robots?
In this thread we collect things to prove that point.

-All foids want Chad
-All foids hate ugly men
-All foids like travelling
-All foids are libtards
-All foids have simps
-All foids like Netflix
-All foids like similar foods
-All foids aren't interested in history or geography
-All foids make fun of men who can't get laid
-All foids have celebrities, which they worship
-All foids want to wear expensive clothes

(Animecel2D)
everey single one of them is the exact sdame. like off some fucking factory tbh, they have npo orignality, nothing different whatsiever

(DepravedAndDeprived)

-All foids have socil media
-All foids think they're more imporant than they really are
-All foids have not had sex with me

(Smitty)
-All foids have it easy
-All foids hate men
-All foids are evil

(metabuxx)
- All foids live on tutorial mode
- All foids are whores on Tinder and OnlyFans
- All foids want us dead
- All foids fuck dogs
- All foids are murderers who kill their babies
- All foids are worthless scum of this soyciety

Frankenstein's M. #sexist incels.co

Why it's a bad idea to ascend

I was scrolling pass normie book and noticed yet the same familiar occurrence I saw working in a grocery, men are dating way below their SMV for relationship security, when your looks match sees this she's not gonna be interested in you, even if you've been with her for a while she's eventually gonna give in to the reality that guys 3 points and above would want her and she'll have no reason to be with you, if you're below 5 you must try with cripples to stand a chance and that doesn't guarantee that you won't be cucked, it's over :feelsrope:

IAmWhatYouMadeMe9 #sexist reddit.com

The Sexual Revolution of the 60s was worse than the Holocaust

Sure, in the Holocaust, a lot of people died and it was pretty uncomfortable. But it was over in a couple of years and ever since then J-words have been living with unparalleled special treatment that only women exceed.
The Sexual Revolution was far worse. It undone centuries of social progress. Every achievement we'd made since the 1780s just disappeared. It condemned literally millions upon millions of men throughout the ages to a life of inceldom. It destroyed standards and morals by normalising shit music, drugs and the "club and casual sex" degenerate lifestyle. It was the progenitor of feminism which is and always has been an anti-male/anti-ugly male hate movement.
In short, the Sexual Revolution was our very own Holocaust but we're unlucky enough that it never ends, and we must live in the concentration camp of the degenerate modern day for our whole lives with the knowledge that things will only get worse. Already polyamory is being normalised and considered by sluts to be a valid form of relationship. Serial monogamy (basically the same thing) was normalised a while ago.
We're absolutely fucked, incels. Chad has won. We are hated because we're ugly, and that's the top and bottom of it. Personality means nothing if a slut can go to a club and have sex with a different alpha male every night.

Octavian #fundie goingyourownway.com

Im no Issac Asimov, so bear that in mind when reading this.

Personally, I think marriage will go the way of the mechanical typewriter.Some folks of certain religious or traditional socieities & families thereof will do so, but for the most part it'll fade into history.

As others have noted marriage is becoming obsolete, although IMO the pressure will come from females vs males. There arent enough unplugged men to make a dent in the matriarchy- for every committed man who leaves the system ten more become shackled to it.Rather women will be so disgusted by the spineless fem-dudes their moms created that they'll be repulsed at the notion of shacking up with any 'guy'.I live in a rural area of America and am amazed at the general feminized nature and thinking of average guys nowadays.Forget about urban cities. At times walking through and interacting with people in LA made me feel like I was Don Draper time travelling to 2015.Why the hell would a female shack up with a dude who knows less about a car motor and spends more time in the bathroom prepping then she does?

"Money,duh" you might say in response.
But you dont need a marriage to do that.A simple cohab arrangement is enough in many places, and fairly soon the governments of the world will get hip to the fact that the dudes who dont have women in their lives have a LOT of disposable income . If 80% of the dudes in society are unattached beta males with no kids and no wife, fairly soon someone's gonna realize taxing those guys will pay for a lot of Mr Thundercock's progeny.

Thats how things went in ancient Rome, and thats how things are likely to play out for us.We'll be served with a summons to present proof of gay marriage ,alimony expenses paid ,a court order for child support or a documented relationship with a female....or pay a 40% income tax until we do.The reason?

"All men should share the burden to pay for child support, because patriarchy.Whats more important-a kid or your classic 1965 Mustang restoration?"

At first to sell the "Bachelor Tax" theyll apply it to females as a gesture of "equal burden", but that'll be a non-binding price ceiling. They'll find a beta to happily vouch for being in a relationship so she can dodge the taxman, who wont be encouraged to enforce female recievables due anyways .

Meanwhile , we single dudes will be looking over our shoulders every time we use an ATM.Next floor in the elevator of decline after that is polyamory-ive already seen a few examples of this in LA.One woman in a relationship with a harem of dudes who exclusively 'date' her in return.

The financial squeeze will justify part of this. Want to dodge the 40% bachelor tax, Mister Bluepill? Go find a bored fat girl who's willing to vouch for you to the IRS that you're a taken man.Of course nothing is free in this world......and you'll have to prove to Miss Fatso you have the commitment required to join her roster.

As for the alpha's, itll be a lonely club-moving between harems means pissing off a few women. Itll be the lowest social category of public society; staying out of jail & poverty will mean fake ID's and quick feet.Plate spinning for males will require CIA tradecraft to avoid imprisonment.

I hope we dont suffer a Big Collapse ; the only thing worse then living in a matriarchy is wandering a post-industrial disaster filled with desperate bluepill males ,ruthless whores ,and easy accessed personal weapons with no law or order.You think guys are thirsty simps NOW....just wait until a society of feminized she-dudes have to figure out how to live without Amazon Prime and extended warranties. Just remember-most forms of pornography require electricity to work. As does the production of birth control.

MadMax, the Grinning Reaper #racist freerepublic.com

I went to Temple Un. in the early/mid 60’s. The black thugs just used to rob and beat you. Now they have joined forces with the Hispanic “yuts” to promote the slogan, “The City of Brotherly Love”, aka “The City of Bloody Love”.

Blame it all on Eric Holder, AG and his asslicker Perez, AAS, Civil Rights Division, for not prosecuting the two Black Panther thugs at the election polling place.

They opened the do for a street war on whitey which has been claiming more victims everyday (Just save crime accounts of black on white attacks that show up on FR, and after a couple months, the pattern becomes very clear).

We have the most anti-American, racist President and AG (and other Obama appointees, EPA, NASA, etc) in the history of the country. They make George Wallace seem like an amateur.

Unless Obama and his marxist/racist minions are ousted in November, we can count on more of this anti-white violence and more bodies in the street, like Mexico.

This is also an opportunity for those of us who support a sound, pragmatic Concealed Carry law, and reciprocal CC recognition across state lines law, to hit our state and local politicans to support our right to self defense.

Ask them if they want their wife or son to have to face these thugs without a means of defending themselves.

Where is Goetz now that we need 1,000 of him?

Laura Lowder #fundie patheos.com

(=Additional qoutes against Chuck McKnight and his support for Polygamy=)

Laura Lowder: This is where I want to take a DEEEEP breath and deliver a lecture on the Theology of the Body and the profound significance of monogamy --- heterosexual monogamy. But it would fall on deaf ears.
BUT there is no such thing as a "Faithful Christian" who practices polyamory. Theologically impossible

Mike Spencer: What a tragic and sickening betrayal of Christ. You are going to hell and taking others with you. Just buying millstones for your neck at the moment.

Matt Kellon Robinson: What a tragic and sickening betrayal of Christ. You are going to hell and taking others with you. Just buying millstones for your neck at the moment..

Richard Williams: It's time for the writer of this article to realize that their beliefs and the true Christian Church can not coexist as one because they are advocating for sin to be accepted.

Ray D: This is great satire. Oh, wait, it's not satire. Someone actually believes this load of B.S.

cryptic__egg #sexist incels.co

[Serious] You should subtly insult fat foids

Whenever you get a chance to remind fat whores that their SMV is not as high as they think it is, take it. Direct insults will lead to attacks from simps, but there are subtle ways to put those disgusting landwhales down.

Be sure to comment on weight loss as a positive and attractive thing, while commenting negatively on weight gain. This isn't directed at a person but it reminds overweight foids that their weight is bad. Make fat jokes when possible to reinforce this.

Landwhales should be as ashamed of their weight as we are of our faces.

Infinite LDAR & mNFwTJ3wz9 #sexist incels.co

RE: [RageFuel] Chads are almost worse than foids

(Infinite LDAR)

Foids are worse because they are more central in the reason of your hatred. Hating chad is just an alternative hatred you developed while making the connection with your women hatred "They hate me because they love chad, so now I hate Chad and I need to find other reason about why I hate them as much as women so I can feel like I'm attacking the reason that cause my inceldom".

You can choose to hate Chad (because of their priviledge) and women (personally I hate everyone who is NT), but it's just not natural to hate chad as much as women because it's obviously women who cause more (daily) pain in your life.

The simple fact that Chad makes women suffer makes me love them more than women. Adding to that the fact that women are the cause of your inceldom/inferiority feeling because they are delusional thinking they are not on normie SMV levels, and that Chad is the cause of your inceldom/inferiority feelings because he's just rational and serve his own interest, if I had to choose, I prefer rationality and male biology more than female biology which disgusts me more.

The "I would do the same if I was Chad" argument doesn't work because if you were a women you would do the same as a women too. It's just that you prefer/identify more in the male nature/role than the women's one, which is why I said hating Chad as much as women is not coming from rationality. It's often an hidden case of whiteknighting "if I kill bad Chads I will get women", even tho for the OP it is not, just his ego talking

(mNFwTJ3wz9)

I hate normans the most for keeping up the illusion of relationships and being cucks.
Normans decided women are sentient and should be represented in society because they look like they're human.
Normans are the majority who sit there and take it like good little cucks.
I think chads who pump and dump are dope. They're the ones who turn foids into seething roasties, and it's fucking hilarious.
I only moderately hate foids because even if they're responsible for this mess, they aren't really sentient and it is dificult to hate something that has no free will.

Atavisionary #fundie atavisionary.com

Western culture has progressively eroded the foundations of the traditional family for at least sixty years. Many on the left claim that the institution of marriage and traditional values are simply a relic of religious prejudice and a symbol of oppression. Part of the problem that allowed such frivolous conspiracy theories to spread was a lack of a comprehensive and objective explanation for why traditional monogamy was instituted in the first place by its defenders on the right. Appeals to divine authority, though effective with some populations, will simply not be sufficient to persuade the minimum number of people necessary in a secular culture to allow it to stay the dominant form of social organization it needs to be to support a thriving civilization. Though religious appeals for monogamous culture should not be thrown out, a secular defense of traditional culture needs to be built up to compliment the arguments of religious authorities.

One of the most useful consequences of a monogamous society is that it unleashes the creative and industrious potential in the largest number of men in society, thereby creating the foundations for a thriving and advancing civilization. In an age of free love, better described as pre-modern love, a significant portion of a man’s energy has to be expended fending off poaching attempts by other males or preventing capricious dalliances on the part of his mate. This is energy that would be much better utilized if directed towards building civilization.

However, the pro-civilizational effects of traditional values are not the only benefits worth considering. Rather than being neutral, the current system of soft polygamy (effective, but not institutionalized polygamy) has active negative attributes. Polygamy benefits men with high sexual market value and young women, but hurts men of middling to low SMV and older women. As high status men take multiple women out of the market place, the supply of women decreases for all other men.

One of the important solutions offered by traditional monogamous values is the prevention of men like Elliot Rodgers from being marginalized in the sexual market place and becoming deranged and violent. In cultures that allow the practice of polygamy, you generate a large underclass of men with no access to women. This leads to an increase in violence, crime, and excessive risk-taking by the frustrated men who are programmed by evolution to do whatever they can to secure reproductive success at any cost to themselves or society. From the standpoint of natural selection, everything is secondary to reproduction. If your current culture reduces your reproductive fitness to near zero, it is a rational, if morbid, instinct to try to disrupt that culture on the part of young men. If you “kick a friendly dog enough times, you get a nasty dog“.

The prevention of this kind of violence is one of the key reasons for having an institution of monogamous marriage. By monogamous marriage, I am not referring to the pale shadow of the institution that exists today. I refer to an institution that provides large disincentives to both men and women against breaking their vows, which is what existed through most of history. Monogamous marriage subordinates the hypergamous instincts of women to the interests of civilization. Those interests ultimately being to create order and general prosperity, which are more beneficial to women than their unbridled pursuit of the highest SMV males. Ironically, monogamous marriage and its motto of “one man, one wife” was probably the earliest egalitarian ideal. Though this ideal is often proven false in practice due to the innate differences between people, in the case of monogamous marriage it has proven the most conducive organization for advancing a prosperous and stable society. We throw that institution away at our peril. I don’t expect this warning to be heeded though, so you can expect many more Elliot Rodgers in the future.

Here is his chilling last video and his autobiography/manifesto.

Samurai kenji #fundie runescape.salmoneus.net

[We no longer live in the middle-ages, where young girls are married off to older men (in some cases, in their 30's) to start having children until they die]

My mothers side of my family does and as i've said we all turned out fine none of us have any special genetic gene that causes us to cope better with the fact that all my female relatives were "victims of pedophiles" and i assure you that Naha city isn't stuck in the dark ages so why if my mom could turn out so well can't the other girl? It's because people like you keep going blah blah blah pedophiles are evil blah blah blah they need to be shizzle. Which i completely and 100% agree with as you might know from my other posts in similar topics truely lusting for a young child and being unable to control your urges is sick and you don't deserve rights in my eyes. However for )hopefully the last time.

THIS IS NOT PEDOPHILIA!

She's bleeding and as i've said is no less secually and developementally capable then the average 16 or 17 year old who we as society have no real problems with letting run off with a 50 year old man. In my eyes him wanting to have a secual relation with her is no worse then him wanting a sexual relation with a more petite 16 year old it's just a matter of how society chooses to better inform the 16 year old because some old man picked a number out of a hat and said that people over that age can do more then people below it. Theres no mistaking that the 12 year old girls probably making a big mistake but someone of 20 years of age isn't a saintly all-knowing model of wisdom and maturity. They can't really tell whether the 12 year old girls into it or not. All you Anti-pedo's in this topic are acting like he's this fat creepy psychotic 40 year old. Tell me would this be a big deal if the male was 16? having been both 16 and 20 i can honestly say i'm not all that different. When your going through (or just getting over) puberty numbers and quantitative figures don't really make much of a difference.

As for your preference of the law over nature, i can do nothing but respect your opinion theres no way to debate your preference you have your opinion i have mine. I see nothing wrong with this the only difference i see between 20 and 12 is one different digit and a different numerical order i see her as a woman by physical standards you obviously don't agree.

[just because she's menstruating doesn't mean her frontal lobe has developed enough to make fully rational decisions. They are physiologically/cognitively less mature than people older than them. They probably still think as a child. It's not until later teenaged years that the cognitive rationality associated with being mature is developed.]

I disagree i think that by 12 they have the cognitive ability to make these types of decisions however i'm not a doctor and have only taken one university psychology course which had no relation to children. However being 20 myself i can say without much need of proof that i also have yet to fully develope mentally and therefore i'm just as justified in making mistakes as she is. Who really gets to judge who's developed enough to do what they want? Yes there are certain obvious boundaries and had this girl been 10 and the man been in his 30's or older i'de have the same opinion as TheBlackSuperman or John but 12 and 20 just don't seem far apart enough (both developmentally and numerically) to be considered sick or wrong.

[Opinion? if it was just my opinion, mr.20 year old pedo wouldn't be behind bars now would he, its not just "MY" opinion.]

Your opinion + the opinion of a bunch of grumpy old farts who have more influence on people then they should. I'll bring this up again TheBlackSuperman my mother was 13 when she gave birth to me and my dad was in his mid to late 20's i CHALLENGE AND DARE YOU to explain why she and her mother and her mother and her mother were all capable of having a succussful relationship with these "Hunters" and now live pretty fufilling lives without any real complaints about there childhood and why this girl can't. Seriously you seem like the type to give it a shot go for it.

[No, it is wrong for an adult to take advantage of a child, and have sex with that child." We as a society have a duty to our children, and to keep them from making such mistakes.]

Except what authority do you have to judge it as a mistake? I'll invite you to take up my challenge aswell.

My mother was brought up in a very American culture and had a child with a very American man. He may or may not have just been interested in getting some fresh good kitty! or he may have legitimately loved and cared for my mom none the less he eventually left her and she was forced to care for yours truly all by herself she was left a single mom to a "Pedophile" but within a couple years she got over it moved to the states got a university degree and is now living happily and even ocassionally meets with that pedophilic monster to have a cup of coffee with him when she visits Los Angeles. Why are these 2 so different? infact the Man in this article is a bit younger then my dad is and is certainly much less mentally developed and my mom was no further ahead developmentally then any other girl her age. Yes 8 times out of 10 things go bad but that means 2 times out of 10 they go right it's a gamble and so long as they know the odds and have some guidance i feel a girl of 12 years of age has the right to decide whether she wants to have a sexual relationship with this man.

[I don't know how you managed to conjure the "bright side" out of that article, long story short, he took advantage of her, she had a kid, he had enough then ditched her most likely moving on to greener pastures, she grew up hardened her skin and made the best out of a bad situation, forgave him and that's about the jist of it.]

I guess theres not a "bright side" to the situation however it turned out no worse then any other guy ditches baby momma story its unfortunate but nothing sick or wrong occured and she was never scarred by the fact that she had sex with an older man. Also why do you assume he took advantage of her it's not often but as i think i forgot to mention he did indeed for a while legitimately love and care for her without any unnatural sexual urges they had sex after having atleast a bit of a normal relationship. Whos to say this 20 year old was going straight for the sex yes he probably was but that doesn't mean the next 20 year old to like a 12 year old girl is going to be the same. I'm not denying that the man in the article was quite possibly a creep if i knew him i certainly wouldn't want anything to do with him but i still stand by my opinion that a 12 year old and a 20 year old wanting to have a relationship isn't that terrible and isn't pedophilia and therefore shouldn't really be a crime (or atleast not a severe one)

ElliotsDisciple #sexist reddit.com

Simps/White Knights/Betas/Orbiters need to be purged.

So, I was just browsing Normiegram and somehow stumbled onto the page of an instawhore with 3 million followers. Decided to see who makes up the majority of her followers, no surprise.. it's simps. There is no fucking way that 3 million men can lust after 1 talentless whore. This over abundance of dick makes the incel struggle harder because now any average, fat, or ugly whore can get on instagram and have a million simps worshipping her. Then these whores develop an ego the size of Jupiter in real life. Its already bad enough we have to compete with fucking Chads, now these bitches think they deserve to be treated like goddesses too. Despite all of this, I don't blame the whores, I blame the remedial betas who worship these bitches. If more of these men woke the fuck up then maybe our gender wouldn't be treated like shit, people would go back to dating their looksmatch, and incels would finally get a taste of "love". Until then fuck betas, simps, white knights, orbiters, normies, and anyone who agrees with this unfair system. Betas make it so that women get an over abundance of love, while incels get none.

TL;DR: Fuck Thirsty Betas.

C. Daniel Motley #fundie thegospelcoalition.org

Chuck and his wife made their announcement on Facebook. They were opening up their marriage to other relationships.

I had only known Chuck through a few mutual acquaintances, but he and his wife seemed like a normal, monogamous couple. The comments section erupted in praise and cheers for their “courage and bravery” to commit to others outside the marriage covenant. While a few people attempted to question the wisdom of pursuing additional partners, they were drowned out by a chorus of defenders quick to shut down such “bigoted” and “judgmental” concerns.

What made the announcement so shocking wasn’t the decision to embrace polyamory. Like many others, I’ve been expecting that ever since the Supreme Court paved the way for polygamy in the Obergefell ruling on same-sex marriage. What did surprise me were Chuck’s arguments for polyamory from Scripture and Christian theology. Apologies for sexual relations outside of marriage based on consent have been around for decades. But justifications of polyamorous relationships based on Trinitarian language and Jesus’s charity ethic are a recent and dangerous development—a threat to a proper understanding of Christian sexual ethics.

From Consent to ‘Christian’ Polyamory

Franklin Veaux, creator of the popular polyamory lifestyle site More Than Two, defines a polyamorous relationship as “a romantic relationship where the people in the relationship agree that it’s okay for everyone to be open to or have other romantic partners.” Psychologists and social scientists differentiate between types of polyamorous relationships, including swinging (spouses who seek other partners for casual sex), polygamy (the marriage of multiple spouses), and polyfidelity (the commitment between partners to not form relationships with those outside the group), among other poly-type practices. Ultimately, non-Christian polyamorous individuals believe consent alone is the centerpiece holding the relationship(s) together—anything beyond this is up to the individuals involved.

“Christian” polyamory builds on this foundation of consent, but seeks to normalize the relationship by appealing to misreadings of the scriptural witness and creative interpretations of Christian theology. Jennifer Martin, describing her own journey to discovering Christian polyamory, says that as a young, traditional Christian she “[got] married young, felt trapped by the conservative bounds of purity culture, and wanted to explore the sexuality that we never really got a chance to have.” For her, this meant taking a boyfriend alongside her husband of nine years, a man with whom she shares two children.

Chuck’s Facebook post was shocking, but it serves as a warning to Christians living in the wake of the sexual revolution: almost nothing is out-of-bounds.

Although Martin uses the language of consent to justify polyamorous relationships, she hesitates to stop there. She wants to ground her polyamory in a revised vision of the Christian life: “Even though I subscribe to a postmodernist view of Scripture,” she says, “I still found it hard to believe I wasn’t ‘dirty.’ And it’s been difficult to find spiritual leaders who both accept my feelings as natural and respect my deep faith.”

Twisting Scripture

Writers and teachers such as Jeff Hood are all too willing to provide just such justification for Christians wishing to pursue these types of relationships. Hood, a progressive pastor in Dallas and former SBC minister, claims that “love is the thrust of Scripture.” He sees the polygamist relationships pursued by the biblical patriarchs (e.g., Abraham, Isaac, Jacob) as problematic, but the arrival of Jesus signals an era of love and tolerance that supersedes the Old Testament. When confronted with Paul’s teaching on marriage, Hood dismisses him entirely: “I find Paul’s patriarchal words to be derogatory, demeaning, and dismissive.”

Martin and Hood make similar appeals in their attempt to justify polyamory as a valid form of romantic love for Christians: (1) Both mention the Old Testament’s portrayal of polygamist relationships to signal God’s openness to other options besides monogamy, while critiquing the Old Testament's patriarchal bent; (2) both use Jesus’s perceived silence as proof of his approval of non-monogamous, non-heterosexual romantic relationships; and (3) both critique Paul’s views on sexuality, dismissing him as a illegitimate representative of the views of Jesus.

On Chuck’s widely shared post unveiling he and his wife’s adoption of polyamory, he takes secular progressives to task for their slow acceptance of Christian polyamorous couples: “The Christian church has come a long way on matters related to human sexuality. . . . However, the same can’t yet be said for another relational orientation: polyamory.” Chuck claims “thousands of faithful Christians” practice polyamory. While he doesn’t offer statistics to support this claim, he’s right to note that even progressives are slow to accept polyamory as a valid sexual framework for marriages.

Erin Wathen, a pastor in the progressive United Church of Christ, is one of those unconvinced that polyamory is a constructive path forward for Christians. Although she affirms her belief in the goodness of same-sex marriage, she nevertheless says: “I am convinced that there’s something to the one and one, that marriage is best kept as a covenant of two. I am still convinced that fidelity means loving the one you’re with—body, mind, and spirit.” Ironically, she laments that she sounds like one of those “old-fashioned traditionalists.”

Next Era of the Sexual Revolution

The increasing acceptance of polyamory by progressives and (soon-to-be former) evangelicals is symptomatic of the church’s witness to God’s normative pattern for sexuality after Obergefell. Pressured (or freed) to come to terms quickly with their accusers in the wider culture, these teachers have taken license with the biblical text to open a path for LGBTQ and polyamorous persons into the church without the confession and repentance of sin required by Scripture. Moreover, there is a noticeable lack of reference to the uniform witness of Christians throughout history that—until a few years ago—denied any sexual relationship outside heterosexual marriage has God’s blessing, on the grounds that such relationships are counter to his revealed pattern for marriage.

Chuck’s Facebook post was shocking, but it serves as a warning to Christians living in the wake of the sexual revolution: almost nothing is out-of-bounds. Polyamory is but the next movement to find an accepting audience among professing Christians already willing to justify any consensual sexual relationship with revisionist readings of Christian history and theology. Many Christians have been warning those of us who hold to monogamous heterosexual marriage as sexuality’s only valid expression that this day was coming.

Are you prepared to answer “Christian” polyamorists’ claims?

Vox Day #wingnut #racist #crackpot #dunning-kruger voxday.blogspot.com

The Alt Right is of the political right in both the American and the European sense of the term. Socialists are not Alt Right. Progressives are not Alt Right. Liberals are not Alt Right. Communists, Marxists, Marxians, cultural Marxists, and neocons are not Alt Right.
The Alt Right is an ALTERNATIVE to the mainstream conservative movement in the USA that is nominally encapsulated by Russel Kirk's 10 Conservative Principles, but in reality has devolved towards progressivism. It is also an alternative to libertarianism.
The Alt Right is not a defensive attitude and rejects the concept of noble and principled defeat. It is a forward-thinking philosophy of offense, in every sense of that term. The Alt Right believes in victory through persistence and remaining in harmony with science, reality, cultural tradition, and the lessons of history.
The Alt Right believes Western civilization is the pinnacle of human achievement and supports its three foundational pillars: Christianity, the European nations, and the Rule of Law.
The Alt Right is openly and avowedly nationalist. It supports all nationalisms and the right of all nations to exist, homogeneous and unadulterated by foreign invasion and immigration.
The Alt Right is anti-globalist. It opposes all groups who work for globalist ideals or globalist objectives.
The Alt Right is anti-equalitarian. It rejects the idea of equality for the same reason it rejects the ideas of unicorns and leprechauns, noting that human equality does not exist in any observable scientific, legal, material, intellectual, sexual, or spiritual form.
The Alt Right is scientodific. It presumptively accepts the current conclusions of the scientific method (scientody), while understanding a) these conclusions are liable to future revision, b) that scientistry is susceptible to corruption, and c) that the so-called scientific consensus is not based on scientody, but democracy, and is therefore intrinsically unscientific.
The Alt Right believes identity > culture > politics.
The Alt Right is opposed to the rule or domination of any native ethnic group by another, particularly in the sovereign homelands of the dominated peoples. The Alt Right is opposed to any non-native ethnic group obtaining excessive influence in any society through nepotism, tribalism, or any other means.
The Alt Right understands that diversity + proximity = war.
The Alt Right doesn't care what you think of it.
The Alt Right rejects international free trade and the free movement of peoples that free trade requires. The benefits of intranational free trade is not evidence for the benefits of international free trade.
The Alt Right believes we must secure the existence of white people and a future for white children.
The Alt Right does not believe in the general supremacy of any race, nation, people, or sub-species. Every race, nation, people, and human sub-species has its own unique strengths and weaknesses, and possesses the sovereign right to dwell unmolested in the native culture it prefers.
The Alt Right is a philosophy that values peace among the various nations of the world and opposes wars to impose the values of one nation upon another as well as efforts to exterminate individual nations through war, genocide, immigration, or genetic assimilation.

TL;DR: The Alt Right is a Western ideology that believes in science, history, reality, and the right of a genetic nation to exist and govern itself in its own interests.

The patron saint of conservatives, Russell Kirk, wrote: "The great line of demarcation in modern politics, Eric Voegelin used to point out, is not a division between liberals on one side and totalitarians on the other. No, on one side of that line are all those men and women who fancy that the temporal order is the only order, and that material needs are their only needs, and that they may do as they like with the human patrimony. On the other side of that line are all those people who recognize an enduring moral order in the universe, a constant human nature, and high duties toward the order spiritual and the order temporal."

This is no longer true, assuming it ever was. The great line of demarcation in modern politics is now a division between men and women who believe that they are ultimately defined by their momentary opinions and those who believe they are ultimately defined by their genetic heritage. The Alt Right understands that the former will always lose to the latter in the end, because the former is subject to change.

2016 FSTDT Awards

Nominees and Candidates

The Nominations #announcement fstdt.com

Here are the candidates and nominaitons for the 2016 FSTDT Awards!

Thanks to everyone who made nominations! Also special thanks to my husband and Pharaoh Bastethotep for their help doing tl;dr snippets of the quotes

When casting your votes on quotes — for either a Fundie of the Year candidate or for a Quote of the Year nomination — remember that the snippets provided here are intended to be a convenience giving you a general gist of what the quotes are about. If you decide to vote for a particular quote, then you should first click its quote-number link and read the original quote in its entirety to make sure you don't have any second thoughts. It is also a wise idea to consider your second pick as well and read its full quote too before casting your final vote: if you change your mind after voting, your vote will not get to change with it. All votes are final with the exception of typos or similar errors. If you find yourself equally torn between two or more candidates, then you should definitely always read their full quotes before deciding!

You don't have to cast a vote on everything up for vote. You may abstain from as many or as few things as you like, but remember that you lose your abstained vote; you cannot use it as an "extra" vote somewhere else.

—

[font=sans-serif]Religious fundie of the year[/font]

• David J Stewart – #122928: Leviticus selectivity, shellfish ok, gehs bad
• Sassy – #122088: "I flew in a plane what is different between that space and the space higher up? Where did Jesus go to when he was seen ascending into heaven? If Space is above the clouds where is heaven? You see there is a difference between Man and God the heavens above and heaven"
• cmdrjones – #121628: "Atheists have constitutional rights by being citizens, but by denying the existence of a creator no one with two brain cells to run together would trust that they would respect anyone else's rights. So, they simply should never be afforded political power... What with their miserable track record and so on. "
• kingjameswriter1965 – #122435: "Now they claim they can use this hadron collider to bring forth the Devil and all his fallen ones."
• Mack Major – #118255: "People who come from a voodoo or an old southern hoodoo background know about spirit husbands. These are actual spirit entities that become attached to a woman through ungodly sexual and spiritual activity."
• Catholic Nationalist – #117704: "Catholicism is objectively the coolest religion. So cool in fact that the word cool is not nearly sufficient. What other religion allows you to literally eat God every day?"
_

[font=sans-serif]Right-wing fundie of the year[/font]

• Abolish Abortion Florida – #121877: "The political committee Abolish Abortion Florida (AAFL) has launched a ballot initiative to amend the state's constitution to punish abortion as capital murder."
• Donald Trump – #122148: [Donald's twitter tirades are, mercifully, already auto-summarized by Twitter's 144-character limit, but they are too numerous to list; we'll do a short vote on picking one if he wins. –shy]
• Jim (Jim's Blog) – #120562: "We should protect our gays from Muslims and kill them ourselves."
• Roosh Valizadeh – #120431: "Punish Trump haters with your cock: Besides the punitive element of withholding your cock from a Trump hater, we can also look at it from a time-saving perspective. If you are masculine, you simply won’t connect naturally with a feminist who hates Trump."
• Students Against a Democratic Society – #116770: "We’ve done slavery (Issue 3), we’ve done lynching (Issue 11) – well, we haven’t done them, but you know what I mean."
• The Last Trump – #118465: "[Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Virginia Transboy Who Sued School District to Use Men’s Restroom] THIS, is one of the biggest issues of our time!? Sort of reminds you of Nero fiddling while Rome burned doesn't it?"
• Vox Day – #121392: "TL;DR: The Alt Right is a Western ideology that believes in science, history, reality, and the right of a genetic nation to exist and govern itself in its own interests."
_

[font=sans-serif]Left-wing fundie of the year[/font]

• nikkipotnik420 – #120947: "You defend trans 'women' because its just another way for men to force women to coddle males and put them before our own needs and its transparant as fuck."
• Mark Carey, et al. – #117469: "Feminist glaciology is rooted in, and combines, both feminist science studies and postcolonial science studies to meaningfully shift present-day glacier and ice sciences."
• Johan Nygren – #118613: "Diagnoses are the contemporary equivalent of racial biology. [...] It’s ADHD and bipolarity and schizophrenia and autism was used to legitimize wage slavery"
• University of Capetown Students – #122204: "They believe that [...] you are able to send lightning to strike someone. So, can you explain that scientifically" [Response: "It's not true."] "What you're trying to do is collapse the space and make it antagonizing, which we will not allow. This is a progressive space for people to say their opinions."
• National Union of Students – #118198: "The National Union of Students’ LGBT Campaign has passed a motion calling for the abolition of representatives for gay men – because they 'don’t face oppression' in the LGBT community."
• Aysegul Gurbuz (Labour Party Moonbat) – #118102: "If it wasn't for my man Hitler these Jews would've wiped Palestine years ago. Sorry but it's a fact. [...] Not hating on Jews btw"
• Bailey – #117389: "It’s not irresponsible behavior to not tell someone you have hiv [...] It’s not irresponsible to have sex with somebody without telling them."
_

[font=sans-serif]Conspiracy theorist of the year[/font]

• GLP Anonymous Cowards – #122457: "DO NOT GIVE IN AND MASTURBATE BEFORE THE ELECTION. It will lower your core energy to the lower chakra levels where that the demonic scum need the population to reside in for their ritual magick to be effective."
• Nicolas Maduro – #123066: "He added that the situation is an attack by Colombian criminal groups and Venezuela's MUD opposition coalition "combined with international mafias via an NGO hired by the US Treasury." [...]The NGOs, according to the official, hire criminal organizations to move 100-bolivar bills, the largest bill in circulation now, to Colombia and from there to other countries, such as Switzerland, Poland, Ukraine, Spain, Germany and the Czech Republic, where the money is stored in large warehouses."
• Alex Jones – #118606: "I’m pro-human so I say, black people, especially, stop killing your kids and get them in church, whatever, take them away from Beyoncé, who wants to eat their brain with the CIA, literally."
_

[font=sans-serif]Sexist of the year[/font]

• nikkipotnik420 – #120947: "You defend trans 'women' because its just another way for men to force women to coddle males and put them before our own needs and its transparant as fuck."
• sexselector – #101724: "Pain should never be considered a part of life. Being in pain is not a good evolutionary strategy. [...] Men’s choices in the patriarchy *created* women’s pain."
• Matt Forney – #117165: "It’s time to stop beating around the bush: feminists want to be raped."
• Saint Elliot – #122565: "The pussy of females can be used even 2 days after their death. Their sexual resources get wasted with the current system and people often die because there aren't enough organ donors."
• David J Stewart – #120671: "If your husband wants his cereal in a certain bowl or wants you to wear a certain dress in public... JUST DO IT! If your husband wants you to rinse his glass for 15 seconds or asks you to roll his socks into a ball... JUST DO IT! If your husband wants more grain in his meals... JUST DO IT! If your husband doesn't like the smell of certain foods when you cook them... then DON'T DO IT! If your husband wants you to put the twist back onto the loaf of bread... then JUST DO IT! If your husband wants the toilet seat up at all times... then JUST DO IT! It may not seem fair to you but it is YOUR JOB ladies to HELP your husband."
• Vox Day – #117889: "If the definition of rape is stretched so far to include women who have not given consent, then I am absolutely a serial rapist. So, too, is every man I know."
• Navigator – #123052: "Rape should be legal. It is this simple. A woman is a sexual object."
_

[font=sans-serif]Racist of the year[/font]

• James Laffrey – #116723: "The jews say Adolf Hitler ordered a 'Final Solution' of extermination of the jews. But Hitler, a humanitarian, a vegetarian, an artist, did no such thing — although, again, he should have."
• Wotans Krieger – #117230: "In the Reich that is to come these bastardised noble familes will have no place of honour for they are enfeebled distortions of the once racially pure Germanic aristocracy. Thus we must begin again the restoration of the caste system. Building on the vision of the Rigsthula I propose that these reconstituted castes [...] The Rigsthula makes it clear that this caste was an alien one. The very presence of the Thrall in our lands represents a very real threat to our biological survival as a racial community. Some of these Thralls may outwardly appear to be people of our own blood but the obese, the sexual degenerate, the drug addict, the alcoholic and the career criminal should be regarded as part of this slave under class and the necessary corrective measures undertaken. They are the Untermenschen much prized by the liberal elite."
• Janet Bloomfield – #117222: "Don't ban [the burka]. Use it to pick the next one to deport. #MakeAmericaGreatAgain #WhyWomenShouldNotVote"
• Vox Day – #121315: "As it happens, the ruination of the United States is the result of the 'contributions' of two groups of immigrants, Irish and Jewish."
_

[font=sans-serif]Single-issue wonk of the year[/font]

David J Stewart: Creepy-ass Taylor Swift fixation
• #123073: "This perverted screenshot of Miss Swift to the right only appears in this 3:54 minute video for ONE SECOND TOTAL!!!"

Mack Major: Witchcraft and the Occult
• #122812: "The biblical word for medicine in the New Testament is pharmakeia: and it means SORCERY. In other words witchcraft, occult power, black magic and potions. Why would Jesus Christ expect His followers to rely on the power of witchcraft or black magic to save them???"

Navaros: God's Holy Righteous Penis
• #121503: "You will have to face HIM in ALL of HIS MALE PATRIARCH KING FATHER HOLY RIGHTEOUS PENIS-OWNING GLORY!"

Ann Barnhardt: Made-up fundie disease "Diabolical Narcissism"
• #122361: "Diabolical Narcissism is of the most severe variety, what we refer to as “psychopathy”, and thus she [Hillary Clinton] is an Alpha Narcissist, very much desirous of personal power, all the way up to the national and even global level."

WorldGoneCrazy - Anti-abortion crusader
• #120192: "All I know is that if fetuses could defend themselves with a gun, there would be no abortions."

Vox Day - Evolution denialism
• #120508: [Eric Hovind is refuted by a sixth grader] "t is a form of intellectual combat where the goal is to discredit the interlocutor. [...] Frankly, I'd be surprised and a little disappointed if I didn't have the kid in tears and questioning his faith in science within minutes after asking such a pair of stupid questions [...] Destroy the interlocutor."
_

[font=sans-serif]Vulture of the year[/font]

• #122859: Mack Major – "Someone may ask 'Why are you using this tragedy to promote your ebook?' The simple answer is because it saves lives! Hate to say I told you so, but had those who were partying read my ebook, they most likely would not have been there in the first place [at the Oakland warehouse fire]"
• #119803: crunchymama – "My heart is heavy over every aspect of this. that some of those killed were believers[...] that everyone involved turn to Jesus, that our 2nd Amendment rights aren't taken away"
_

[font=sans-serif]Batshit-insane person of the year[/font]

• usachinanukewar, #117354: "This divine pneumonia time bomb in my lungs implanted by Jesus years ago is the best ever gift I’ve received from Jesus."
• ComeOnPeople, #122200: "I know longer believe what the government told me about the world. To me they have taken the biblical account and turned it upside down. Making everything revolve around the sun, which is contrary to what the bible says and what scientists and historical artifacts claimed up until nasa."
• Vox Day, #119003: "War destroyed the body, but it did not destroy the spirit and the soul in the way peace and prosperity have."
• Joe Eigo, #116613: "His sword cuts through what NEEDS to be TRANSMUTED by Lord Zadkiel of The Violet Ray which is the Ray OF TRANSMUTATION AND MERCY AND ALCHEMY. Lord Michael comes along FIRST and TRANSFORMS IT (IN EASIER TERMS ,CHOPS IT ALL UP (NOT RIGHT TERM) AND LORD ZADKIEL LAUGHED WHEN HE SAID LORD MICHAEL LEAVES HIM THE "MESS TO CLEAN UP WITH THE SWORD OF VIOLET FLAME HE WIELDS OF TRANSMUTATION.WE ARE IN THE VIOLET RAY AGE RIGHT NOW. THE AQUARIAN ONE. IT'S THE 7TH RAY."
• Saint Elliot, #123058: "Heck, I even considered having sex with a dog cadaver that died outside my window but sadly the janitor threw it away before I could go out and get it at night."
_

[font=sans-serif]Funniest quote of the year[/font]

• #106783: "We will use your leaning tower of pizza to throw off homosexual"
• #120864: "Of course, [FSTDT commenters] are all socks of Valri, so the logistics are not too difficult. :-)"
_

[font=sans-serif]Nightmare fuel quote of the year[/font]

• #119250 (Ryon Travis sov-cit house of horrors)
• #120032: "Recent discourse on child pornography falsely portrays it, like child sex in general, as a disaster for the child. [...] Yet there are many children seen in child pornography whose words, facial expressions, body language, and orgasms show that they thoroughly enjoy the sexual activity, sometimes enjoying it immensely."
_

[font=sans-serif]One-liner of the year[/font]

• #122830: "You don't know how much you should fear Jesus"
• #119953: "If I could be in the bedroom of every pro-choicer's when they have sex just to talk to them, I would. I could make them see how beautiful life actually is."
• #121425: "Beware the beast Hildabeast Clinton and her Vagenda of Manocide"
_

[font=sans-serif]WTF?! quote of the year[/font]

• #122633: "[STEM] Syllabi promote the positivist view of knowledge by suggesting that there are correct conclusions that can be drawn with the right tools [...] the syllabi reinforce the larger male dominant view of knowledge as one that students acquire and use to make correct decisions."
• #123064: "[Beezow Doo-Doo Zopittybop-Bop-Bop] explained that his first name represents 'the explosion of awareness of the interconnectedness of the infinite love in the universe.' Doo-doo 'is the struggle of our daily lives with that awareness, that with love comes chaos,' and Zopittybop-bop-bop 'is the outcome of that struggle, which is often ironic, especially because all life ends in death.'"
• #120864: "Of course, [FSTDT commenters] are all socks of Valri, so the logistics are not too difficult. :-)"
_

[font=sans-serif]Incel quote of the year[/font]

• #122565: "The pussy of females can be used even 2 days after their death. Their sexual resources get wasted with the current system and people often die because there aren't enough organ donors."
• #121548 "Modern Western women hate respect. They hate consent. They love bloody beatings. They love death. [...] You are the ones who don't see what's wrong."
• #123058: "Heck, I even considered having sex with a dog cadaver that died outside my window but sadly the janitor threw it away before I could go out and get it at night."

[font=sans-serif]Board of the year[/font]

• /r/IncelHeaven
• Return of Kings
_

[font=sans-serif]Commenter of the year (winner!)[/font]

• Hasan Prishtina
_

[font=sans-serif]Troll of the year[/font]

• TimeToTurn
• Anonymous "enlightened seer" (see here for where the madness begins — one can only hope it's a Poe)
_

[font=sans-serif]Conspiracy theory of the year[/font]

• PizzaGate
• The Mandela Effect

Cyralea #fundie reddit.com

Women want to be raped by a high value man

Not pussyfooting around this one. Title is literal.

If anything could ever be classified as a Feminist's Nightmare, it's the irreconcilable notion that women are extremely aroused at the thought of being able to make a high value man so lustful that he loses control and has to have her. Many women have struggled with this concept. Some have cleverly come up with positive terminology to deflect from the dissonance; they'll use terms like "ravishment" to doll it up, as if simply assigning a new word takes away from the reality of what's going on.

Here in TRP we do not shy from these realities. What goes through a woman's head when she contemplates being ravished is that she is of such high SMV that men lose their control just to have her. This is a level of validation few women get to truly experience. The male equivalent would be a pair of beautiful women demanding that you have a threesome with them.

I've no doubt this type of post causes SJW's to froth at the mouth, but their impotent rage doesn't invalidate reality. Consider the success of 50 Shades of Grey. The basic synopsis is that a powerful, rich, alpha man completely lusts and forcefully dominates a perfectly boring average woman. You'd think this banal concept would only sell to a fringe that gets off on this kink, but the book sold 70 million copies in 8 months. That's more than any Harry Potter novel. And now that the movie is out I guarantee it will be a box-office hit. Let women scream and "Wow, just wow" at you all they want -- their words mean nothing in relation to their actions. Women want to be taken by force by a high value man.

So when is it rape instead of ravishment? Aside from obvious cases of drugging someone or having sex with the unconscious (for the feminazi retards: No one here condones these instances of legitimate rape) the difference is strictly in the disparity of your SMV's. The stranger-in-the-bush is often characterized as some seedy low-life thug. This evokes intense fear. Being forcefully held down in bed by the muscular CEO of a Fortune 500 company does not evoke this fear. No woman alive is comfortable by the idea that she enjoys rape, so she needs to reframe it. Be aware of that.

So how does the average TRP'er benefit from this? If you're already sexually active with a woman, discuss the concept of a safeword. Even though women love the idea of being taken, there's always the chance that she may be in one of those emotional frames where she genuinely isn't up for sex, this is a failsafe. Once you've established that, next time you're looking to sexually escalate simply ignore her token attempts to refuse. She turns her lips away from a kiss, you force her against a wall and take it. She tries to push you off, you squeeze her. You grab her and throw her onto the bed, then lay into her with your weight so she can't get away. And so on.

Paradoxically this creates intense arousal and pair-bonding in women. I encourage you to try this. Of all the women I've had sex with only ~5% genuinely hated rough, aggressive sex. The other 95% beg for more afterwards. Surprising how many victims offer to make food and drink after their "trauma".

Return of the Harem of Strawwomen!

DermoscopyStudier #sexist reddit.com

I agree with everything said here

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I posted this on incels a while back. Let me know if I missed anything, because after all, I wouldn't want to unfairly generalize women.

All women fall into one of the following categories:

Ditzy nursing student/nurse: She might not be a nursing student (though the odds are good that she is), but rest assured, she is at least reasonably hot, and she is dumb. She might also be a dental hygienist. She writes and types like a child, she can’t hold an even remotely intelligent conversation with a male, yet she succeeds in life because it is impossible for females to fail classes. The teachers will not allow it. And she will be affirmative actioned into a job after she graduates. Her boyfriend/husband is a 7+. Catch her in the supermarket wearing her work clothes. This is the future for a lot of “Staceys,” as you call them. Cheerleader-type.

Somewhat-attractive liberal artsy feminist: Has dyed hair but is fairly cute. She’s “polyamorous.” She’s just exploring her sexualityyyyy. What this means is that she collects Chad dicks like they’re going extinct. If she has a boyfriend, she’s openly cucking him…and he pretends to be fine with it because that’s the “enlightened” thing to do these days. Hello, it’s The Current Year, women LOVE SECKS as much as menz!!!111 The heterosexual ones are all subs in BDSM. Some of them are confused lesbians who claim to be bisexual and will peg their effeminate boyfriend. He’s gotta be pretty, though. This ain’t a prison. She will eventually realize she’s gay and thank her effeminate boyfriend for helping her figure this out.

Ugly dyed-hair feminist: Probably wears thick-framed glasses. A walking modern cliche…don’t really need to go into the description too much. Privilege, patriarchy, problematic, rape, rape culture, abortion (cough “women’s issuez”), mansplaining, etc. Into BDSM, but paradoxically, if she is heterosexual, this manhater is a sub. In the bedroom, she wants you to treat her like a slut and choke her. If she’s a lesbian calling herself “bisexual,” she enjoys pegging submissive men who are effeminate because she is really into women.

Lesbian: She has either lost interest in pretending to be bisexual for the “look at me” factor, or she’s the masculine type who was boyish from a young age.

Quiet artsy prude: This type of chick doesn’t want to have sex at all. She’s a hipster and so is her boyfriend, who is a pussy iphone-toting, Starbucks-drinking numale feminist who won’t pressure her to do much in the bedroom. When she does have sex, she lies there like a dead fish. She’s obsessed with pretty thingz (“art”) and loves her Pinterest account. This includes pretty, dainty little foods/recipes. The blueberry muffins sawed in half on a cutting board with shards of wheat in the ambiance are fine, but what she really wants is pictures of some kind of Asian cuisine. You know, shit that really shouldn’t be anything more than an appetizer. Remember, everything has to be pretty, little, dainty, light, chic, and hip. She thinks she’s quirky and creative, but it’s all a put-on. She cares about making the image in her mind real more than whether or not she actually enjoys it. And any male who enters her world will have to fit that mold…especially since sex hurts her narrow vagina.

Fat black woman: If you’ve met one, you’ve met them all. They’re loud, they’re obnoxious, they’re sassy. They drive like their attitude. If you’re at a 4-way stop sign and you get there first, they ain’t waitin’ for no other cars…get outta her way! She bitches constantly about how black men be datin’ them white women and they caynt handle a STRONG. BLACK. WOMAN. “Dat’s why dey be shirkin’ they responsibilities to they baby mommas and da 5 keee-yids dey had out of wedlock.” “Your honor, he ain’t payin’ his challlld suppote.” If your cock is below 7 inches, they think it’s TINY. They thought Chris Brown’s dick (of which pictures leaked), which is probably longer flaccid than mine is erect, was “tiny.” And they will fight yo ass. Black men generally aren’t white knights the way both the numales and the religious, southern, “you hit a woman you get a whoopin” white men are, so they will give these feral hyenas what they deserve if it comes to it. It only takes about 84 punches and slaps before a black man has finally had enough and drops her with one punch.

Non-fat black woman: See “Fat black woman,” but add an extra layer of pretentiousness. The race whining will make you want to strangle her.

Fat white woman (non-feminist): This is separate from the morbidly obese woman. If you think her being fat will make her standards lower, think again. She’s vicious and thinks men are beneath her. That Tedx talk Youtube video of the fat woman bitching about men who meet her standards not wanting to date her…that’s what they’re all like. Eventually, a Chad comes along and dates her…oftentimes a black Chad (a Tyrone?), since blacks love their big booties, even if it’s really a fatass with a fat ass. The guy had better work out, because he needs to be able to make her feel like a dainty woman in the bedroom, after all…and that’s quite difficult because she’s a “curvy” woman. You know, the curves extending outward from her stomach? Anyway, if you’re not Chad, you’re always at risk of being yelled at and belittled by this creature. If you are Chad, you’re at risk if you don’t want to date her, because that means you’re shallow and can’t handle a woman with a HEALTHY BODY TYPE. She’s opinionated, condescending, and thinks she’s smart, but she’s actually a complete idiot, and there’s nothing worse than opinionated idiots. Lately, there has been a trend for slender 7 males to date these fat white women, and you can bet these are abusive relationships, with her bossing him around and him taking it either because he is getting off on it because he has a fetish for being submissive to a fat white woman and kissing her feet, or just because he’s that desperate and has no self respect. Either way, she has absolutely no respect for him, and will dump him/cuck him at first opportunity.

Morbidly obese white woman: Usually some form of white trash. This is an incel’s “league,” I’m afraid. May be missing some teeth. Hygiene probably lacking. She’ll do it because to her, it’s just “fun.” She doesn’t give a fuck so she’s willing to give fucks. Aside from that, a headcase…but what did you expect? You don’t get to be like 300 pounds as a woman without being mentally fucked up. Incel competition is redneck white males.

Non-obese redneck/white trash white woman: It’ll be a cold day in hell before you can ever trust her to be faithful. Southern accent, lousy teeth, and cigarette smoking. Probably addicted to pills and/or booze. If not, she’s certainly close to people who are. At least her standards aren’t as high. She might even cheat on Wayne with a white incel. I guess incels just need to look for white trash females if they want to have any shot whatsoever.

Cute, nerdy little Asian girl: Awwwww. Girls are gamers too, dooooood. Don’t be fooled by her apparent disposition…she will friendzone the fuck out of you if you’re not Chad or at least an Asian Chad. Her Miss Innocent act doesn’t change the facts; you’re her beta orbiter “male friend” and she’s not interested.

Middle Eastern Muslim girl: Her parents will literally kill her for being with a man who is not Muslim. If you’re a terrorist, you’re not incel.

GymChad CC-rider: She can’t even settle down enough to let teachers and employers get her into nursing and hygienist professions. She probably works in real estate, or that will be the height of her career after she’s done as a receptionist. It doesn’t take long before she’s knocked up…and her kid becomes “her world.” Not to worry, Gainz Chad is to the rescue. Sure, she got fucked off Tinder and got some free meals from OKCupid, but in the long run, it’s getting married and divorced a few times to some Gainz Chads who cheat on her (“why are all guyz such jerx?! And my cheating doesn’t count!”) that is going to help her be a perpetual single mom.

Dumb Christian Girl Who Takes Religion Seriously: These are actually a catch, all things considered, but they’re only available for Cowboy Chads. She will invariably end up with this “southern gentleman,” and his hobbies include huntin’ and fishin’. What else to do when they’re not goin’ to church? The Lawd says thou shalt kill animals. He bought himself a truck. The most important men in her life, in order: Jesus, her sons, Cowboy Chad. She’s dumber than planting flowers near a mailbox, but she has no problem with “traditional gender roles.” She will cook for you. She will regurgitate Cowboy Chad’s conservative politics, etc. However, she expects a man to be a “man,” so incels are out, as are numale hipsters. She wants a man of the house. Take the good with the bad.

Psychopath: They really aren’t like other girls. If you don’t mind anything from regular criminal activity to being murdered, if you can find these rare exceptions, you might catch a break. She’s so crazy and delusional she might fuck an incel. Better be a light sleeper; you might want to wake up before she puts the knife to your penis or drowns the kids in the bathtub. Often overlaps with the white trash/rednecks.

SlayorOfWhiteKnights #sexist reddit.com

(In response to a rant of mine about incels and sour grapes)
So what are you saying smart guy? That all those factors are under our control? That if a 53 year old genetically inferior manlet just hits the gym and takes a few showers, he'll be a chick magnet? Are you saying that women aren't hugely entitled and arrogant based on their over-inflated SMV?

Foxes are foxes, incels are incels.

That all those factors are under our control?

No. The problem is that you obsess over what you cannot change while denying what you can change.
Of course, being ugly makes it harder to initiate a relationship (regardless of sex!). Harder - but not impossible.
That if a 53 year old genetically inferior manlet just hits the gym and takes a few showers

This is the shallow understanding of "self-improvement" I spoke of. No, I am talking about improving your character, attitudes and demeanour, not your outwardly appearence.
he'll be a chick magnet?

No. Don't expect miracles from a continuous and arduous process. When the time comes, on the other hand, it will be worth it.
Are you saying that women aren't hugely entitled and arrogant based on their over-inflated SMV?

Yes. For a start, there is no such thing as a "Sexual Market Value" - it's nothing but pseudoscience.)

Improving "character"? How noble! You sound like an ancient Greek philosopher, spouting virtue for virtue's sake. Pardon me Plato, but people self improve to achieve goals. What's the point of self improvement if I'm still a lonely virgin at the end of it? Will I achieve enlightenment?

You say potato, I say potahdo. Even if there's no such thing as SMV, obviously some people are more attractive and get more attention than others. Oh yeah! Those people are Chads and women!

Tokestra420 #fundie reddit.com

Bullying is a good thing


I am a supporter of traditional bullying; things like name calling and locking in lockers and wedgies. This is different than some modern bullying, like hacking into someone's phone and sharing their nudes with the entire school; as that is clearly on a different level.

But I believe that for children, bullying helps teach them ways to cope with those types of people and toughens them up as people. Kids who get bullied should learn how to block out negative influences and to have thick skin; and eventually to stand up and do something to stop it, providing a life lesson and strengthening them as a person.

Trying to protect kids from bullies or stop bullying from happening (which will never work) just teaches kids to be victims, which creates weak adults. These victim children turn into adults that can't stand up for themselves to a boss or assertive co-worker, and continue to play the victim their entire lives instead of achieving personal growth.

Speaking of adults, adult bullying doesn't exist. Once you're an adult you are capable of figuring out how to either stand up to the person or find a way to remove yourself from the situation. Bullying is term for children and doesn't apply to adults, in the same way an adult wouldn't call someone they're interested in their "crush".

And for the record, I was bullied for being overweight most of my life. This opinion comes from my own ability to learn to cope with these "bullies".

TL;DR: bullying makes kids stronger and teaches them not to act like victims their entire lives

Various Commenters #sexist incels.co

(Atavistic Autist)

[JFL] Femoid breaks up with high IQ Jewish physicist because he's an "insecure incel," bemoans the fact that she can't find an intelligent gigachad instead

I dated an incel, AMA

Meanwhile...

Why it is sooo unfair? If a guy is handsome most of the time he is stupid.

The foid literally admits that "personality" = "looks" here.

She juxtaposes a dumb Chad with an intelligent incel, yet specifies that the incel has "no personality."

Foid IQ: 0. She deserves nothing more than to be raped by monkeys (she's already having consensual sex with the "neighbor's dog," of course).

(WizardofSoda)

Thats evolution.. some bloodlines survived based on intellect, others on looks/physical strength.

There is few if any men out there who are handsome, healthy/strong and advanced minds.

(ItsOver4cel)

I’ve said it in previous threads and I shall say it again: foids’ minds are stuck in 10,000BC. They should be grateful to have met a very intelligent man but it just isn’t good enough for this bitch.

Yeah this. Actual intelligent men are pretty rare and these bitches treat them as the product of the week jfl when are they gonna admit they just want to suck Chad's dick and nothing more?

(GoffSystemQB)

People using the word "incel" in place of ugly male is brutal and confirms the blackpill. Jfl if you think Chad would EVER get called an incel regardless of his behavior in a relationship.

(Atavistic Autist)

Her other posts seem quite blackpilled:

We must be more understanding towards Inсels.

She is just being a benevolent feminist here.

She does not contest female control over the sexual selection process, considering it to be a given, and fundamentally agrees with the idea that highly intelligent incels have "defective" genes whereas the boneheaded Chads who make her wet have genes worthy of reproduction.

Her only point is that her fellow feminists should pity incels and say a prayer for us as we're sentenced to death. The only incels who can escape this fate are the psychopathmaxxers who are good enough at pretending to be NT and "alpha" to deceive a woman into believing it.

It would get deleted otherwise, I guess. There are some sentences, that were pretty based, but I need to sleep. She just described the status quo or not? Are you for forced male selection, just curious?

She describes the status quo and then fundamentally agrees with it. Nothing she says is anything more than virtue signalling, combined with her own style of redpilled nonsense.

She considers it an inevitability that females are the judges of what "good genetics" constitutes, their criteria being based on Fisharian Runaway qualities which have no actual bearing on men's fitness. Namely, "personality," which somehow a Chad who's dumber than a dog has more of than an intelligent incel (her reasoning being that intelligent incels tend to be neurotic and this doesn't make her cunt wet, like extroverted and imbecilic Chads do).

According to her, incels have to pretend to be those extroverted and imbecilic Chads in order to possibly impress a foid and then have sexual success with her. This is just a feminist version of the redpill. We need to deceive women with our perceived alphaness! Why not just put women into their place as inferior creatures who must submit to us?

She virtue signals about ultimately liking "ugly yet intelligent guys," but it's belied by her own stated nature, her own admission that Chads make her instantly wet and intelligent guys are merely a curiosity to her. She must be subjugated, or else she's just a hypocrite who's promoting the devolution of the species.

Top kek, do they have any self awareness at all, are they thick as shit or know what's up but don't give a fuck as to do so would be like folding on a pair of aces?

She wants a man who is high on the intelligence hierarchy, high on the looks hierarchy, and high on the NT hierarchy at the same time. This is her "Mr. Right." She is a picky bitch who is using the evolutionary psychology of the blackpill to justify her insane standards.

Intelligent men tend to be ugly, introverted, and neurotic if not autistic (in her terminology, "sociophobic"), and this makes her cunt shrivel.

On the other hand, sociopathic men who are attractive, extroverted, and outgoing tend to be dumber than dogs, which quickly bores her.

She wants the best of all worlds -- a giga-IQ, giga-NT, giga-Chad who mogs everyone, a man who she can bear settling down with. JFL.

Haha yeah she can totally get that if she gets herself a superhero reality, brilliant scientist takes strength serum or dumb brute has his brain Lasered with evolutionary beam.

Fucking dumb cunt, why would a guy that gets everything from his looks waste time reading books; no need & of course if you ain't turning heads you cope to get the good career & betabux a bitch but as we know this method ain't worth shit no more what with female empowerment of employment & simps. They call men the picky ones lol.

Hopefully she will find her standards satisfied in a Ted Bundy.

Intelligent, attractive, extroverted. The trifecta.

But a psychopath who will murder her. Good riddance, slut.

(PPEcel)

Wow, massive blackpill here.

"He is an incel because 1. ugly 2. virgin."

This confirms everything I already knew. You won't get an ounce of respect if you are male and not conventionally attractive. People look at you and based off of your appearance alone will judge your ethical predisposition.

Coming right from the fucking horse's mouth, ITards.

exactly

(FUCKITALLREEE)

JFL a blackpill straight from a femoid mouth, they still try to silence it.

image

Pretty guys are for fucking, smart guys are for dating.

Anonymous MG #sexist blackpill.online

Foids can't be interested in male hobbies

Face it guys, foids won't be interested in the same hobbies we're interested in such as video games or anime. Foids are driven by the sole purpose of raising and maintaining their own value, and the foids who do things like play video games is for an ulterior motive of raising their SMV to increase orbiters.

Various Incels #sexist #pedo incels.co

(Total Imbecile)

[SuicideFuel] [Teenlovepill] This is what the average teenager is doing and what we will never experience

Me (17f) and my boyfriend (17m) have been looking for a place to have sex for a couple of days now. It’s not our first time but we’ve got strict parents and we aren’t allowed to take one another in our rooms. We were short on options because we almost got caught doing it in a car by the cops once so we settled with the woods. I don’t have a car and his mom is using his car to get to work because hers is in the shop so we just walked. We laid a blanket down and started to have sex. It got annoying at times because bugs kept flying on us and we had to shove sticks aside. At one point, I got on top and he was getting too loud so I took my panties and stuffed them in his mouth.

We laid there for a while when we finished because the both of us were extremely exhausted. I ended up taking pictures of him (Not his nude bottom half Ik that’s illegal) because he looked adorable and smiled each time he looked up at me lol.

Overall experience: 7/10 Would I recommend it: Ehh, if you bring a thick enough blanket and aren’t super afraid of bugs, then i guess it’s not too bad.

reddit.com/r/sex/comments/i3p9y0/having_sex_in_the_woods_was_expecting_it_to_be_a/

image

(OverBeforeItBegan)

image

Totally agree with not delaying the inevitable but when is too young? I ask because my 14 yr old daughter has her boyfriend over once a week and I have the rule that her door stays open. I'd much rather she do anything at home than end up in the bushes, whether it's sex or drinking or trialing drugs...so thankful we're not there yet

I don't know many 14 year olds who have sex but I'd say you should probably let them have their door closed when she's 15 because that's when most people I know started having sex.

I had sex at 14, dad by 15 @

Imagine wasting 17+ years of your life and hundreds of thousands of dollars raising this cumdump. I will never get over how there are fathers out there literally raising sets of holes to keep other men's dicks warm and wet.

(slavcel11)

IT: sex isn't everything
15 year olds who actually have sex: fuck the hell out of them at first opportunity

(FAloner)

The missed out / teenlove pill is the second most brutal pill in existence, next to the SMV pill

(TheNEET)

oy, she's a stinky sexual predator and a terrorist who needs to be shoot immediately! after all IT taught me that people under 21 don't even think about sex and even imagining sex with them is a crime so unforgivable you need to immediately report it to the FBI

(Ignas)

Fuarkkk it's overrrr. That chad won't ever know the agony of us being subhumans being told to personality maxx and self improve Maxx to get girls. He doesn't need to do any of that. Teenlove pill is the most brutal thing to me cause it simply can't be recovered. Even if you ascend you'd just be a decent guy to settle with, not the silly boy she tries new naughty things with. If for some miracles you ascend and say to her "how about sex in the woods? Or perhaps we can have fun in cinema?" to spice up your sexless marriage due to her not being physically attracted to you, in her minds she'd picture her doing all those in the past with Chad and it already bored her

(cognitohazard)

literally I was exercising and at the high school next to it, I saw a couple just like this and it hurt so god damn bad
The guy was even on his phone at some points while they were making out, looking a bit disinterested but the girl just kept getting in his face
I thought being on your phone during intimacy was just a meme
if a girl could look at me like she did at him I might get a heart attack

(King_of_morons)

I can't do this anymore.

EVEN IF I ASCEND I STILL MISSED OUT ON THE THRILL OF TEEN SEX, I WILL ALWAYS BE INFERIOR TO ZOOMERS WHO LOST THEIR CHERRIES AT A YOUNG AGE AND I NEVER RECOVER FROM THIS, DAMN IT AAAAAAAALLLLL!!!!!!!!

You must really like pain if you voluntary go to a sub called "r/sex"

I used to do it myself sadly, but I managed to kick the habit. Sexhavers infuriate me so much.

Neither can I, but I'm trudging along
Brutal, I just remembered I'm 20 in two months

Damn, I'm in my 20's and I barely feel like I've aged mentally. Hopefully things will get better for us from here on out.

SilverGryphon #sexist reddit.com

As depicted in the awesome movie called The Matrix, the act of taking in the red pill allows Neo to see the world as it truly is, a simulation designed to subdue mankind and use them for their bodily energy resources. In our case, the matrix is the social construct in which we reside. Since our childhood we are tricked into believing that acting like white knights is a sure fire way to get laid. Women repeatedly state that they only care about a guy’s character and nothing else and yet they still end up banging the hottest stud that they can lay their nails one. When you try and confront them about this lie, they usually always ignore you or steer the conversation away from the uncomfortable question.

TRP allows men to realise that in reality, women mostly care about your status/looks and are primarily attracted to the bad boys. At the very least, it stops many beta males from being providers of money, attention and validation. This very statement alone is enough trigger feminists into a meltdown, even though there is no misogyny about it. When more and more men take in the red pill, women start losing their obiters. Without beta males answering their beck and call, high SMV women would have to actually get things done with their own hands and for them that is terrible since they are so used to having men to do the dirty work.

We are also told that women are generally not interested in sex unlike their male counterparts, whom are far hornier. Some would argue that since there are far more female prostitutes than male ones is proof of this. In reality women are just as horny as men and they simply have an easier task of obtaining sex, unless they are of a very low SMV. In fact if you ever hang around such low value women you would notice that they can be worse than men in terms of being horny. The disproportion in the number of female and male prostitutes reflects the disproportionate difficulty that the sexes face when finding mates. This is another truth that TRP reveals to men, something which women would rather keep hidden and unknown. Women hate it when men discover that women love sex as much as men do and that we can use this fact to our advantage.

Despite their independence, aggressiveness, brutality and general hatred towards men, the mythological Amazons still needed men, known as the Gargarians to mate and reproduce. In the real world, feminists face the same issue. You require both a man and a woman to be able to reproduce. Even if it is done via IVF, you still need sperm from a man and eggs from a female. We all know that good genetics are paramount to having a strong and healthy species.

This is where Chad comes in. Chad is usually gifted with good genetics and women can smell them from miles away. They instantly know that by having sex with them, their offspring has a good probability of having quality genes. This is why Chad gets to act like a total jerk and yet still get good quality women. The need for good DNA overrules everything else and the human race would suffer without good genetics. Unfortunately for women, Chad is not likely to stick around after conception and so they need to find other men to provide them with the significant amount of resources required to raise their offspring.

In a nut shell, Chad has all the fun and the betas do all the hard and dirty work. This works for the human race since good genes are spread and the offspring is taken care of. Some countries such as France have even enacted laws that make paternity testing illegal without a court order. This is so that Chad can freely fuck and spread his valuable genes with little fear of being forced to pay child support as that is the job for beta cuckolds.

This situation is extremely unfair for the beta males and hence more and more men are realising that our society, which is the matrix we live in, is defrauding them. Just like Neo who unplugs himself and eventually causes the downfall of the matrix, a sufficiently sized group of men can bring the whole system down and pave the way for a completely new society, one in which only the maters are the majority providers. The burden on taxes caused by single mothers would sky rocket. If more and more men choose the MGTOW way, there would be fewer taxes to collect as men who decide to give up on women would work less as they only need to think about themselves. Less work means fewer taxes to collect, which would be a problem for any country.

In such a society, there are those who stand to lose a lot, namely the elite ruling class. Ever since democracy came about they had to devise a new way of controlling the population. One such way is having a bunch of cuckold men slaving away at their workplace so that they can be providers of children which are not theirs or for women who divorced them and are now collecting child support. Being overworked, these men have little energy to follow politics and try and challenge the status quo. The women on the other hand are too absorbed in their self-centred lives and couldn’t care less about what goes on as long as the money comes in.

This is why women hate TRP and anyone who dares spread its teachings. TRP allows many men to turn the table around make women the ones who have to work for the relationship instead of the men. Women fear the eventual social overall that it seeks to create, one in which true equality would prevail. Since men are so used to doing the hard work, most would be fine, but the women would suffer the most as they are no longer used to do any real hard work. The sooner this matrix in which we live is destroyed and rebuilt, the better. However it is not an easy task and the feminists, who were probably created by the ruling elite, would go out of their way to destroy any movement geared towards showing the masses the truth.