I like a lot of your rants actually, they are often very logical. We need more logical discussion about the true problems we face and how we can solve them.
>So maybe there are a few angry renegades around here who frequently assert that “islam is right about wahmen” because of their own genetic programing.
Perhaps. One of my theories is that it is simply a bias against anything that could be interpreted as "pro-women," especially if it can thence be construed as "anti-men." The reason I believe this is because often the theories you present are dismissed outright and offhand; there is rarely any true debate and rebuttal of the contents.
I think the war of the sexes has reached critical mass, such that many men are swearing off women entirely due to a (misplaced) sense that women as a group are leading the attack against men. And so, there is this prejudice against anything that even *hints* at men being imperfect and women being "not terrible."
In other words, the way our culture has shifted has left many men jaded at the prospect that they should be considerate of women, and instead believe they should either disregard women or else strike preemptively at their perceived enemy; you already know all about MGTOW and figures like Tate. The fact is, those "pro-men" perspectives appeal to many men, in the exact same way feminism appeals to many women. You've made this observation before, both of those perspectives are two sides of the same coin of self-centeredness and victimization.
I think that the reason those perspectives are so popular is due to a lack of not just racial consciousness but also group thinking, or nationalism. Many who claim to be nationalists are in fact not, because true nationalism has no place for infighting. The National Socialists were true nationalists, they didn't waste time arguing about Protestantism vs. Catholicism, or Christianity vs. Paganism, or men vs. women. The elites have succeeded in atomizing us to such an extent that we have a nation of individuals, all paranoid about each other instead of focusing on who holds the reins.
Alcohol, like all other drugs, simply reduces our natural efficiency at no true benefit. Worse still, it can enslave those susceptible to it, again like all other drugs.
Some would rather willingly enslave themselves to a harmful substance just to avoid bearing the pain of life. Stoicism is a much better tool in that regard.
This makes perfect, logical sense and it isn't even a complex theory. Why, therefore, is it so hard for most goats to accept? Is it simply an issue of ego?
I have my own ideas as to why, however I find it most puzzling that it hasn't caught on more, given how simple of a concept it is; as you say, it's simple math. I definitely believe in another idea you've expressed before, that the kinds of people that are apt to notice the (((problems))) in our society happen to be some of the most disagreeable as well.
At any rate, for whatever it might be worth, I just wanted to let you know that your words haven't fallen on deaf ears in at least one instance. Or I suppose blind eyes would be more appropriate.
I think that there is comfort in the knowledge that at any moment we can cease to be. Whatever tribulations we face, whatever pain inherent in sentience, we have the power to erase at any time we choose. The void of oblivion surpasses *all,* and so it can be a great friend to walk with in life, to remind oneself that they, therefore, can surpass *all.*
I think about this concept nearly every waking moment.
Agreed. Everyone here has heard of 'divide and conquer' yet they routinely fall for it, directing their hatred towards some subset of the White race whose turn it is to be the "great satan," solely responsible for the downfall of the West.
The real enemy, as always, is the jew and anyone that does business with the jew. Every subset of Whites has failed in some way, and fighting about which has failed more or less is futile, as a failure of one is a failure of all.
It's absolutely mind-numbing how most people don't accept this even when laid out simply for them. Almost like they are afraid of the implication, should they accept the truth.
>Monogamy results in dysgenics. The bulk of the reproduction is done by the worst males. The deadbeats, druggies, bad boys.
You have this completely backwards.
Monogamy ensures that most men actually get to reproduce. Most (White) men are not deadbeats or drug addicts, or thieves or murderers, and so it is eugenic that most of them pass on their genes. There is some inevitable dysgenic reproduction within this system, but it is nowhere near catastrophic for a society.
In contrast, polygamy ensures that over time only the most ruthless and warlording men get to reproduce, because they are the ones predisposed to accumulate the most wealth and power within society. In such a system, the majority of men can't get access to women, and will have to steal them from elsewhere. This is a superb driver for war, however this system erodes trust between men within that society, and therefore *is* catastrophic for said society.
The best example of this phenomenon is islam. Shortly after its inception, islam conquered vast territories across many different cultures, in a relatively short amount of time, by weaponizing the male drive for conquest for the acquisition of females. Shortly after, however, their empires degenerated into the most corrupt societies, only being recharged through the arrival of new genetic stock every few centuries. Today muslim countries are among the worst places in the world, while White Civilization is *still* the best (as jewed and niggerized as it has become).
However, the current reign of soyboy "leaders" is proving to be cataclysmic as well. I'd rather support a truly based woman as leader, should one manifest, than a soyboy
The greatest irony regarding jews is that Hitler's worldview was their greatest chance of survival within a racially conscious White world order; they were going to have their own country and be left to their own devices.
They rallied against Hitler's worldview, despite the fact that they not only would have survived but also benefited as a result of it. They greedily rejected the worldview that would have secured their existence, because they sought to exploit the entire world instead of building a country of their own. In doing so, they gambled that Whites would never find out the truth, and never seek revenge.
But now, after what just the last century showed us, never mind all the history before it, their security is no longer a valid option. They have no right to any land, and if we ever wake up again, it will mean their complete end.
"Whites that are or can become racially conscious, and that have not betrayed the White race."
In other words:
1. Whites that already see themselves as members of a racial group instead of simply
"humans," or at least have have the instinct for it even if self-suppressed.
2. Whites that have not committed acts which hindered the White race's survival in any
way (defined as: murder, miscegenation, and highly dysgenic behavior.)
Any Whites that meet that criteria should be welcome. We can be more selective after we are no longer on trajectory for extinction. For the time being, it is imperative that we put aside the minor differences for the sake of survival.
Milk was "hateful", the OK sign was "hateful", and let's not forget even a [smile](https://files.catbox.moe/4rzyly.png) was "hateful." Anything is possible at this point.
It is a religion. No exaggeration, this (anti-White -ism and soyence) is the new religion of the land.
In a video I saw a long time ago, a priest explained it as such:
"You can tell what the true religion of the land is by what you can't blaspheme against. If I blaspheme against christianity, nothing happens. Yet if I blaspheme against the jews/holocaust, I am persecuted."
I don't think NPCs are capable of heartfelt repentance, in general, in their lives. In their minds, all that they do and support is "right" because of their programming, and they don't have the capacity for self-reflection, else they wouldn't be NPCs. The best we can hope for is that they do not pass on their genes.
15MAR 0 points 1 day ago
I like a lot of your rants actually, they are often very logical. We need more logical discussion about the true problems we face and how we can solve them.
>So maybe there are a few angry renegades around here who frequently assert that “islam is right about wahmen” because of their own genetic programing.
Perhaps. One of my theories is that it is simply a bias against anything that could be interpreted as "pro-women," especially if it can thence be construed as "anti-men." The reason I believe this is because often the theories you present are dismissed outright and offhand; there is rarely any true debate and rebuttal of the contents.
I think the war of the sexes has reached critical mass, such that many men are swearing off women entirely due to a (misplaced) sense that women as a group are leading the attack against men. And so, there is this prejudice against anything that even *hints* at men being imperfect and women being "not terrible."
In other words, the way our culture has shifted has left many men jaded at the prospect that they should be considerate of women, and instead believe they should either disregard women or else strike preemptively at their perceived enemy; you already know all about MGTOW and figures like Tate. The fact is, those "pro-men" perspectives appeal to many men, in the exact same way feminism appeals to many women. You've made this observation before, both of those perspectives are two sides of the same coin of self-centeredness and victimization.
I think that the reason those perspectives are so popular is due to a lack of not just racial consciousness but also group thinking, or nationalism. Many who claim to be nationalists are in fact not, because true nationalism has no place for infighting. The National Socialists were true nationalists, they didn't waste time arguing about Protestantism vs. Catholicism, or Christianity vs. Paganism, or men vs. women. The elites have succeeded in atomizing us to such an extent that we have a nation of individuals, all paranoid about each other instead of focusing on who holds the reins.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=680e1e8d3d09e
15MAR 0 points 2 days ago
Alcohol, like all other drugs, simply reduces our natural efficiency at no true benefit. Worse still, it can enslave those susceptible to it, again like all other drugs.
Some would rather willingly enslave themselves to a harmful substance just to avoid bearing the pain of life. Stoicism is a much better tool in that regard.
/v/QuitDrinking viewpost?postid=680ee3f859287
15MAR 0 points 2 days ago
This makes perfect, logical sense and it isn't even a complex theory. Why, therefore, is it so hard for most goats to accept? Is it simply an issue of ego?
I have my own ideas as to why, however I find it most puzzling that it hasn't caught on more, given how simple of a concept it is; as you say, it's simple math. I definitely believe in another idea you've expressed before, that the kinds of people that are apt to notice the (((problems))) in our society happen to be some of the most disagreeable as well.
At any rate, for whatever it might be worth, I just wanted to let you know that your words haven't fallen on deaf ears in at least one instance. Or I suppose blind eyes would be more appropriate.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=680e1e8d3d09e
15MAR 2 points 2 days ago
That will truly be the *War to End All Wars.*
/v/Wallpapers viewpost?postid=680ed7b391194
15MAR 1 point 2 days ago
It's good to disconnect for a while every so often, especially from a place such as this. I hope you feel better soon, fren.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=680d909875d7c
15MAR 4 points 3 days ago
I think that there is comfort in the knowledge that at any moment we can cease to be. Whatever tribulations we face, whatever pain inherent in sentience, we have the power to erase at any time we choose. The void of oblivion surpasses *all,* and so it can be a great friend to walk with in life, to remind oneself that they, therefore, can surpass *all.*
I think about this concept nearly every waking moment.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=680d909875d7c
15MAR 1 point 3 days ago
Fleshlights exist.
/v/Jokes viewpost?postid=680d883d7aec4
15MAR 5 points 1 week ago
"The sacrifice of the woman bearing a child for this nation is equal to that of the man who defends this nation."
- Adolf Hitler
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=680478812d7f0
15MAR 4 points 1 week ago
Agreed. Everyone here has heard of 'divide and conquer' yet they routinely fall for it, directing their hatred towards some subset of the White race whose turn it is to be the "great satan," solely responsible for the downfall of the West.
The real enemy, as always, is the jew and anyone that does business with the jew. Every subset of Whites has failed in some way, and fighting about which has failed more or less is futile, as a failure of one is a failure of all.
/v/Boomers viewpost?postid=680390a5ca756
15MAR 3 points 1 month ago
It's absolutely mind-numbing how most people don't accept this even when laid out simply for them. Almost like they are afraid of the implication, should they accept the truth.
/v/ZOG viewpost?postid=67e91f978aa0b
15MAR 2 points 2 months ago
>Monogamy results in dysgenics. The bulk of the reproduction is done by the worst males. The deadbeats, druggies, bad boys.
You have this completely backwards.
Monogamy ensures that most men actually get to reproduce. Most (White) men are not deadbeats or drug addicts, or thieves or murderers, and so it is eugenic that most of them pass on their genes. There is some inevitable dysgenic reproduction within this system, but it is nowhere near catastrophic for a society.
In contrast, polygamy ensures that over time only the most ruthless and warlording men get to reproduce, because they are the ones predisposed to accumulate the most wealth and power within society. In such a system, the majority of men can't get access to women, and will have to steal them from elsewhere. This is a superb driver for war, however this system erodes trust between men within that society, and therefore *is* catastrophic for said society.
The best example of this phenomenon is islam. Shortly after its inception, islam conquered vast territories across many different cultures, in a relatively short amount of time, by weaponizing the male drive for conquest for the acquisition of females. Shortly after, however, their empires degenerated into the most corrupt societies, only being recharged through the arrival of new genetic stock every few centuries. Today muslim countries are among the worst places in the world, while White Civilization is *still* the best (as jewed and niggerized as it has become).
/v/ClownWorld viewpost?postid=679b80b9454f4
15MAR 2 points 3 months ago
>If you're lesbian? You're cool
Nah. 100% straight or bust
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=678ce09e68ba3
15MAR 2 points 3 months ago
However, the current reign of soyboy "leaders" is proving to be cataclysmic as well. I'd rather support a truly based woman as leader, should one manifest, than a soyboy
/v/USPolitics viewpost?postid=678ca077691a2
15MAR 2 points 3 months ago
The greatest irony regarding jews is that Hitler's worldview was their greatest chance of survival within a racially conscious White world order; they were going to have their own country and be left to their own devices.
They rallied against Hitler's worldview, despite the fact that they not only would have survived but also benefited as a result of it. They greedily rejected the worldview that would have secured their existence, because they sought to exploit the entire world instead of building a country of their own. In doing so, they gambled that Whites would never find out the truth, and never seek revenge.
But now, after what just the last century showed us, never mind all the history before it, their security is no longer a valid option. They have no right to any land, and if we ever wake up again, it will mean their complete end.
/v/DeepThoughts viewpost?postid=678cb74a43fab
15MAR 0 points 3 months ago
>Whites are the only "humans", everything thing else is a different species chimp lover.
That's not how Whites that aren't yet racially conscious see things.
/v/TellUpgoat viewpost?postid=678ae446bdade
15MAR 2 points 3 months ago
The bar is simply this:
"Whites that are or can become racially conscious, and that have not betrayed the White race."
In other words:
1. Whites that already see themselves as members of a racial group instead of simply
"humans," or at least have have the instinct for it even if self-suppressed.
2. Whites that have not committed acts which hindered the White race's survival in any
way (defined as: murder, miscegenation, and highly dysgenic behavior.)
Any Whites that meet that criteria should be welcome. We can be more selective after we are no longer on trajectory for extinction. For the time being, it is imperative that we put aside the minor differences for the sake of survival.
/v/TellUpgoat viewpost?postid=678ae446bdade
15MAR 5 points 3 months ago
Milk was "hateful", the OK sign was "hateful", and let's not forget even a [smile](https://files.catbox.moe/4rzyly.png) was "hateful." Anything is possible at this point.
/v/funny viewpost?postid=678aed2f3bd93
15MAR 2 points 3 months ago
It is a religion. No exaggeration, this (anti-White -ism and soyence) is the new religion of the land.
In a video I saw a long time ago, a priest explained it as such:
"You can tell what the true religion of the land is by what you can't blaspheme against. If I blaspheme against christianity, nothing happens. Yet if I blaspheme against the jews/holocaust, I am persecuted."
/v/ClownWorld viewpost?postid=678adb1036082
15MAR 23 points 5 months ago
Imagine if every single time nigs acted up this was the response. Imagine the clean streets...
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=67302b1cb8a18
15MAR 0 points 5 months ago
[A bit of info I wrote about the topic.](https://www.upgoat.net/viewpost?postid=654bec4597f52)
[Words of the man himself.](https://files.catbox.moe/a63c5w.mp4)
/v/ThankHitlerEveryday viewpost?postid=672e8a8814f76
15MAR 0 points 5 months ago
https://files.catbox.moe/iitl35.jpg
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=672e8e81e0c7a
15MAR 1 point 5 months ago
Ay Tone, if this is a death camp then how come them broads got maternity wards??
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=672e825c6c34b
15MAR 1 point 5 months ago
Name the jew, reject the poison, surf the Kali Yuga, and stay revolutionary frens.
/v/ThankHitlerEveryday viewpost?postid=672e8a8814f76
15MAR 5 points 5 months ago
"Never forget these people want you dead..."
I don't think NPCs are capable of heartfelt repentance, in general, in their lives. In their minds, all that they do and support is "right" because of their programming, and they don't have the capacity for self-reflection, else they wouldn't be NPCs. The best we can hope for is that they do not pass on their genes.
/v/CovidWorldOrder viewpost?postid=672e5ccd2e894
15MAR 2 points 5 months ago
Uncle Mel even said that it felt like a cop out to represent the blacks around the house as anything but slaves.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=672e3cec4cbdb