Blah blah blah.
Lots of words, nothing to say.
A broken record repeating itself, a self-masturbatory game of cognitive self-assurance through contempt directed at those who would shake your faith.
But it's not me whose questioning your trust in centuries old prophecy, its your own critical faculties.
You are just externalized that part of yourself into me to make assaulting it palatable to your ego.
I don't own a fishing boat, I don't have a license to fish, nobody will hire me as a fisherman.
If you think I'm being overly literal, think again.
I don't have any means of earning money, trying to make or harvest such a means from around myself violates the law, and nobody will give me the means of making money (say, a job).
Being willing to work hard and save what you earn is good, but you need to have work to do and income to save. I barely make enough to feed myself for two days with one meal on each day.
Everyone refuses to help me out of my situation, they offer me hopes and prayers and occasionally they treat me to some food so that I could get a third or fourth meal that week.
Lots of people like watching the montages of the homeless guy rising up out of poverty, usually that involves offering some service or good that costs more money than I could afford to spend, or getting a job somehow at someplace that wasn't business savvy enough to know how much of a liability homeless people are as employees.
I think they enjoy those narratives because they cover up the ugly truth of just how fucked our society is. If I could get a job just by asking for one, believe me, I would. It wouldn't matter how shitty of a job it is, id work my ass of at it.
I'm heading down to Niagara falls, gonna sneak into American where the jobs are. Canada can go to hell for all I care. There's no hope here.
But we won't do anything like that. We've been blowing hot air since 2015 and probably much earlier. There will be no collapse unless we do the demolition work, no happening until we make it happen, if the shit hits the fan, it's us who needs to be the one to turn the fan on, and to be the ones that throw the dookie at it. The JWO know very well what they are doing, they aren't retarded, they rule the world for a reason. If you use religion to cope by saying "then why do they reject God?" You've proven yourself even more retarded because you are the same mindset as the guys who've been predicting the rapture for thousands of years.
Libertarians are covert eugenicists and white supremacists that disguise themselves as egalitarian degenerates.
Anyone who sees the long game understands where it leads in just three or less generations.
By definition, degeneracy is self destruction.
Social liberalism without economic interventionism equals a ruthless meritocracy that purges suboptimal conduct from the genepool with ruthless efficiency while protecting optimal players in the game of survival.
It also provides ethnically pure communities to white nationalists immediately after its inception with self-sovereignty and freedom of association being fully realized.
These reasons and more are why the alt right made libertarianism their preferred political stance.
If you got your first job in your teens or early 20s, you have hope.
If you didn't, but spent that time gaining experiences and qualifications which would help you get employed, you still have hope.
If neither, you don't have a chance, not today. Not unless you lie your ass off and somehow not get found out or successfully beg their forgiveness after being discovered.
Today you are only as good as you appear to be on paper, if you arent the best looking on a screen somewhere, you aren't getting the job. It's even worse now that cold unfeeling algorithms are the ones reading your applications/resumes/cover-letters/cv's.
Everything us fake and gay, it's all about superficiality and pretension.
We are in a desert where it never rains, I have access to an oasis spring, the only water source for many miles and miles.
You cannot get water unless I agree tk give it to you, yet you have nothing that I cannot get from almost everywhere and/or from anyone else.
Does that not give me power over you in my refusal to provide you with my permission to take a drink from my water?
Remember, the first farmers became the first of the royal families, becaue they had ample access to a resource that everybody needed, but had very few needs that they required the aid of others to fulfill.
Now, imagine the same scenario as it applies to both the working/earning economy, and to the sexual/marriage market.
Britonian myth influenced by Celtic myth influenced by Norse myth influenced by Roman myth influenced by Greek myth influenced by Egyptian myth influenced by Mesopotamian myth.
Learn about perennialism. One cradle of civilization with one mythology gives rise to many descendant civilizations with their own descendant mythologies.
I'm not advocating for paganism nor for lgbt. I advocate for a paradigm that is actually dangerous to the global establishment. The kind we created on b all those years ago in 2003-2013.
The Bible had been changed many times since it was first written. King James is one of the most respected versions of the Bible and also the most heavily embellished.
We have find the origins of many biblical passages due to archeology, and the Bible we see is a frankensteinian stichjob where many kings and other influential figures just added, removed, or changed parts of the book to suit the political climate of their day. It's the exact opposite of what you describe it as.
The Bible had ceased to be modified now but Christian practice today has certainly not abandoned this quality to itself.
Christians are constantly changing what it means to be Christian or to practice Christianity, again the biggest factor is whatever the most powerful or influential figures within Christian circles thinks wouod best suit them politically.
You have no holy book, you have no religion, and the influence of Christianity had been catastrophic in that it gave us both the right and the left.
Communism is people practicing Christianity as the Bible commands, but with the exemption of God. The morals of the typical libcuck atheist are based on enlightenment period moral philosophy where they wanted to create a way for people to follow the moral teachings of christ without worshipping him.
I'd say that the moral teaching of Jesus was a lethal poison to begin with, the momment we accepted the ideas we were doomed.
That weakness was a strength to be lauded and strength was a weakness to be ashamed of or guilty for. "The meek with inherit the earth, the rich shall not enter the kingdom of heaven" vs "You white folk better apologize for colonizing us".
But worse was that we should care about the happiness and suffering of all people. That's a Christian stance that the philosophers transformed into ideas like utilitarianism and deontology, they were just recreating christian morality without reference to christ.
There was good reason that Neitzsche saw that the Communists and the Christians were the same when it came to what their moral paradigms were.
The pre-Christian moral paradigm begins not with some higher moral law, or the good of mankind, but with the good of oneself, and from that we derive the good of certain others whom we care about such that their happiness is our own, or whose benefit pays dividends to our own benefit, or to that of the aforementioned loved ones.
The dirty secret of Christians within the nationalist sphere is that their religion is inherently incompatible with nationalism, they are commanded to care for all of mankind, and so they cannot put one subset of men before another while still being faithful to Jesus.
Nationalism requires a basis in egoism, that sees the good of oneself as the highest good, if not the only one, as stated before, following the path that seeks to optimize one's own happiness and pleasure while minimizing one's own suffering and misery naturally leads to nationalism as an extension of this philosophy.
Either it's a result of "I care for my family and friends, and so their happiness is my own", or "I am a white man, so anything that privileges whites over non-whites or men over women is to my own benefit", or "I love my own people, but I don't feel quite the same about that other group of people who are unlike me".
Christianity prevents one from being a nationalist by virtue of its very nature, only ignorance or deliberate rejection of its teachings can allow one to be a nationalist of the ethnic variety.
We can see this in the rhetoric of Christians within nationalist circles, they judge of character rather than on skin color, being more concerned with the actions of members of groups rather than their DNA.
For me it's all about the 14 words, I care only about the existence of White people, their children's futures, and also for the utilitarian ratio with regards to those of the White race - by maximizing their happiness & pleasure, while minimizing their suffering & misery.
If observed biblically Christianity is communism with the addition of God, and communism is the attempt to follow the moral and political ideas of Christianity without the presence of God.
In Christian vs atheist debated it often comes down to two guys that agree om what is good and evil, to the point that there's no question of whether something like racism is morally wrong or something like women's rights are morally right. Instead they accuse each other of not sufficiently adhering to the moral standards they both agree upon.
The places where they have their differences are insignificant trivialities.
Now, an egoist moral paradigms accepts that there is not one universal standard by which good and evil could be judged, everyone has their own ideas about what is good or evil since it is based upon how it makes them feel personally. Good and evil become synonymous with good and bad, as in, they are matters of individual preference, subjective valuation.
Egoism is in this way a school of moral relativism. But that's not to say that it advocates that you refrain from making your judgements and acting upon them.
To the contrary, the central view of morality from an egoist perspective is that the evolution of morality is all about conflict between competing moral viewpoints, and the elimination of the ethical preferences of the weak by those which are held by the strong. Its a world of warring viewpoints.
Everyone has their own set of things which make them feel happy or sad, they desire to cultivate the conditions that make then happy, and to prevent the conditions that make them sad, desire and fear.
It's all about the neurochemicals that reward our brains with pleasurable feelings when we are in circumstances that are good for increasing the number of organisms with genetic similarity to ourselves.
Our brains also punish us with neurochemicals that make us feel painfully under circumstances where it is more likely that the number of genetically similar organisms would decrease.
FYI it's not just the matter of our survival and procreation, but that of our closely-related kin or phenotypically-similar folk as well.
We are monkeys on juice, all motivated by the pursuit of the same chemical highs, and avoidance of the same chemical lows, we just all want these things for ourselves, and have chosen different proxies for getting them.
Each perspective is different, and so this naturally leas them into conflict, egoism advocates that each individual fight to impose their view and get their way, the best man wins and trains his life moral victory with an actual victory of outlasting the guy with the competing view.
Proponents of the concept of an "objective" morality like to conflate moral subjectivity with permissiveness and a refraining from casting judgemnt or acting to enforce one's own ideas of ethical conduct upon others. Something egoism is actually all about.
They do this despite Christian doctrine commanding them to withhold judgment of others and punishment of their crimes.
Or probably becaue of it, in my history I've seen that every accusation made against another is potentially a confession of being guilty of the same kind of charge they've laid against another.
Its a coping mechanism as well as a way of distracting others from the failures on ther own end, by identifying them in another. Too bad it's become predictable.
The Christian types love to huht down pedophiles on the left, and accuse their secularism of facilitating the sexual crimes perpetrated with minors, however they have a dirty secret in that the Bible does not condemn sexual relations with children, and that wouldn't be an issue except that the Bible does lay out some pretty extensive prohibitions with regard to sex laws, the lack of an issue with child-fucking was a very prominent absence.
Christians may try to say that the Bible has a rule forbidding child marriage, but I couldn't find it anywhere.
Pagans love to talk about the degeneracy of the modern west, but ignore that pagan myths are all pretty much d-teir degenerate shut.
I'm talking incest, pedophilia, vore, bestiality, transgenderism, necrophilia, and more, all with a heavy dosage of rape throughout.
/d/ could make an animated porno that is filled with the most fucked up fetishes where there a multiple scenes of animals raping women, where it is not even the most deviant sexual elements in there - and it is just literally the mythology of pre-Christian civilizations within Mesopotamia, the Nile Valley, The Middle East, Greek-Roman, Norse-Germanic, Celt-Briton, and Slavic lands.
They'd just let the many sexual scenes play out as they likely had.
And the Bible was written by peole who took so many of the stories of pagans, then changed them a bit to make their owm stories.
As stated before, the Bible had been changed many, many times, the original versions were probably just as deviant as the pagan myths were, but over time those elements were played down, likely one of the reasons being the need for the precursors of Christianity wanting to distinguish their religion from those of the pagans whose stories they'd used as a basis for their own mythology.
Another cause might be an increased fear of disease and new measures put in place to lessen the likelihood of people being ill or otherwise disabled.
I mean, they would have noticed the consistencies among those who had frequently gotten sick or conceived babies with infirmities, and those who hadnt. They didn't need to two the cause or mechanisms specifically to observe that peopw who ate pork tended to get the shits more often than those who hadn't.
Imagine you write a story, then someone takes a concept from your story and uses it to name a concept that fits with it, and then a third person invents an occasion associated with that event.
Easter is a celebration of vernal rejuvenation, where the seasons cease getting colder and begin to het warmer instead, they linked this concept with fertility because of all the pregnancies that were likely resulting from men and women being stuck inside due to the cold weather, also it seems like everything is being reborn, so like winter is associated with death, spring is associated with birth.
If there ia a goddess of fertility, any holiday in her honor is likely to be celebrated in this season.
As the sun rises in the east, we could associate it with all the above concepts, it wouod make sense to name it accordingly.
Everything about the gods embodied their concepts, and they were often named for the concept they represented, in turn, concepts these gods personified and related phenomena were often named for the gods to which this was attributed as a part of their domain.
Basically, it's not unlikely that the holiday could be names for the direction or the goddess, or that the direction could be named for the goddess. All such things are a strong possibility.
Eostre and Istar are the same damn goddess. It's jew nonense to take a difference in spelling or pronunciation and make it out to be the locals talking about something different. They did the same with jack the rapper's graffiti talking about the jeus being avenged, and made a case about how it's not talking about the heebs because it's spelled different. Years later and DNA confirms the identity of the ripper to be a kike immigrant from poland that wanted to kill british gentile whores.
Many Catholic apologists have taken their lessons on rhetorical bullshiting from the kikes. No wonder they got better as the universal house of christ got closer and closer to the jew world order. Seriously, the amount of yid influence in the Vatican is staggering.
It's aa good as the economy is. By which I mean the way things are for me depends on how the economy is doing, I'm in the stateside now because Canada is fubar.
International students and other "newcomers" create large homeless populations of White Canadian citizens due to how they get into entry level jobs and then bring their families into the same business, filing them up with their relatives from the home country.
They are gatekeeping access to the entirety of the employment options in Canada for those who lack the qualifications to get anything other than the jobs that anyone should be able to attain.
The jobs market is getting blockaded for White Canadians without the work history to get into post-entry jobs by mostly South Asian, MENA, and Sub-Saharan African immigrants.
Most of these immigrants are completely ignorant of the harm they are causing, they are surprised that we don't have family members who are willing to support us by sending us money and providing us a place to stay, as is the case for pretty much all of them. Thats the thing with these immigrants, none of them are homeless or broke, they have money coming in so even if they don't have a job in Canada they are totally fine, and if everything gets bad for them just fuck off back to their country, taking anything of use they acquired while here back along with them.
Most White Canadians who get their first jobs do so through connections because that's the only way to get your first job. If you are a White guy on the streets without any connections, you are pretty much fucked when it comes to getting work.
Most homeless here are White citizens who are willing to work but unable to, eventually they fall into crime and drug use.
They burn out inevitably, and this is accelerated by the fact that the city itself seems to hate them, they are not allowed to sleep in a place that is warm and comfortable for long, the shelters are such an absolute hellhole that most unhoused avoid then like the plague, entering them only as a last desperate resort.
I see the idea of turning to crime to better oneself as 100% legitimate and justifiable, and I see revolutionary action as totally okay in the exact same light.
Mexico has a large white population, their are Spanish speaking Hispanics of Spanish descent, but they are pale to fair skinned, and European featured, with hair and eyes of colors other than black and brown. 100% "caucasian".
The only people he preached to were jews as well, he explicitly excluded non-jews from receiving his message, and for them he had a separate message: that they be the loyal and obedient slaves and sefvants to the jews.
Even this story is not the win you think it is once you consider what it was exactly that was happening in the context of this event.
He whipped the changers of money and merchants outside the temple steps because Jewish law forbade commerce within the grounds of the houses of worship.
He was enforcing Jewish law upon jews and called the God of the Jews his father.
He was reforming the practices of the jews to make them more consistent with their own religion, so as to lead then back to their roots, but then with the added twist of then calling him their messiah speaking of himself as the direct son of God, which had been conceived with a (married and teenaged) mortal woman.
The fact that his mother was married to Joseph meant that Jesus was a bastard and thus not immaculate, one of the many things that hurt his claims to being the messiah.
Jesus had a brother, born to Joseph and Mary he had a better claim to being the messiah than his more famous brother did, because one of the prophecied qualifications for being the messiah was to be born of the line of David, but Jesus could not make that claim of himself as Mary was not of the one of David, Joseph was.
Claiming that God was his father instead of the man who had raised him actually hurt his chances of being accepted as messiah.
Those who point fingers tend to be the ones most guilty of the charges they launch against others.
Rule #1 of dealing with accusations should be this.
Very first thing you do, is always investigate the accusers for the kind of crimes they lob accusations at others for.
Nobody talks about young girls getting raped by women.
Thing about female pedophiles is that when they go after boys, they are rarely ever true pedophiles, going after boys who have yet to begin the process of puberty, which occurs at 8 years on average.
They tend to go after boys well over the age of eight, when their bodies have already begun to enter into the process of puberty, making then hebephiles, not pedophiles.
Or they go for teenagers, who are either in the late stages of finishing up their puberty development or have already completed the process of reaching sexual maturity and adult stature, making them ephebephiles.
But when a lesbian/bisexual woman molests a girl, true pedophilia is a lot more represented among them, in fact, it's more popular for them to go after prepubescent girls (whom they could better groom and control) than to go for teenagers (who are more difficult to manage, and more likely to become chatty).
Almost everything is unnatural then, as social norms change along with the rest of society.
If we're talking about modern society, both pedophilia and racism are unnatural, deviant, and they both run counter to popular social norms whether you're on liberal or conservative side of the aisle.
AntiPostmodernist 0 points 4 weeks ago*
Blah blah blah.
Lots of words, nothing to say.
A broken record repeating itself, a self-masturbatory game of cognitive self-assurance through contempt directed at those who would shake your faith.
But it's not me whose questioning your trust in centuries old prophecy, its your own critical faculties.
You are just externalized that part of yourself into me to make assaulting it palatable to your ego.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=66185b4186dda
AntiPostmodernist 1 point 4 weeks ago*
I don't own a fishing boat, I don't have a license to fish, nobody will hire me as a fisherman.
If you think I'm being overly literal, think again.
I don't have any means of earning money, trying to make or harvest such a means from around myself violates the law, and nobody will give me the means of making money (say, a job).
Being willing to work hard and save what you earn is good, but you need to have work to do and income to save. I barely make enough to feed myself for two days with one meal on each day.
Everyone refuses to help me out of my situation, they offer me hopes and prayers and occasionally they treat me to some food so that I could get a third or fourth meal that week.
Lots of people like watching the montages of the homeless guy rising up out of poverty, usually that involves offering some service or good that costs more money than I could afford to spend, or getting a job somehow at someplace that wasn't business savvy enough to know how much of a liability homeless people are as employees.
I think they enjoy those narratives because they cover up the ugly truth of just how fucked our society is. If I could get a job just by asking for one, believe me, I would. It wouldn't matter how shitty of a job it is, id work my ass of at it.
I'm heading down to Niagara falls, gonna sneak into American where the jobs are. Canada can go to hell for all I care. There's no hope here.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=66185dc7ef135
AntiPostmodernist 0 points 4 weeks ago
But we won't do anything like that. We've been blowing hot air since 2015 and probably much earlier. There will be no collapse unless we do the demolition work, no happening until we make it happen, if the shit hits the fan, it's us who needs to be the one to turn the fan on, and to be the ones that throw the dookie at it. The JWO know very well what they are doing, they aren't retarded, they rule the world for a reason. If you use religion to cope by saying "then why do they reject God?" You've proven yourself even more retarded because you are the same mindset as the guys who've been predicting the rapture for thousands of years.
/v/random viewpost?postid=647fa9f3efedb
AntiPostmodernist 1 point 4 weeks ago*
Libertarians are covert eugenicists and white supremacists that disguise themselves as egalitarian degenerates.
Anyone who sees the long game understands where it leads in just three or less generations.
By definition, degeneracy is self destruction.
Social liberalism without economic interventionism equals a ruthless meritocracy that purges suboptimal conduct from the genepool with ruthless efficiency while protecting optimal players in the game of survival.
It also provides ethnically pure communities to white nationalists immediately after its inception with self-sovereignty and freedom of association being fully realized.
These reasons and more are why the alt right made libertarianism their preferred political stance.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=6617eaf254115
AntiPostmodernist 1 point 4 weeks ago
If you got your first job in your teens or early 20s, you have hope.
If you didn't, but spent that time gaining experiences and qualifications which would help you get employed, you still have hope.
If neither, you don't have a chance, not today. Not unless you lie your ass off and somehow not get found out or successfully beg their forgiveness after being discovered.
Today you are only as good as you appear to be on paper, if you arent the best looking on a screen somewhere, you aren't getting the job. It's even worse now that cold unfeeling algorithms are the ones reading your applications/resumes/cover-letters/cv's.
Everything us fake and gay, it's all about superficiality and pretension.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=661825f821b95
AntiPostmodernist 0 points 4 weeks ago*
Oh, you are retarded. Let's make it simple.
We are in a desert where it never rains, I have access to an oasis spring, the only water source for many miles and miles.
You cannot get water unless I agree tk give it to you, yet you have nothing that I cannot get from almost everywhere and/or from anyone else.
Does that not give me power over you in my refusal to provide you with my permission to take a drink from my water?
Remember, the first farmers became the first of the royal families, becaue they had ample access to a resource that everybody needed, but had very few needs that they required the aid of others to fulfill.
Now, imagine the same scenario as it applies to both the working/earning economy, and to the sexual/marriage market.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=661825f821b95
AntiPostmodernist 1 point 4 weeks ago
Not a good thing, the pendulum between acceptable political opinions swings back to a previously held position.
What I want is the alt right, what I want is 4chan /b/ 2003-2013.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=6617eaf254115
AntiPostmodernist 1 point 4 weeks ago
Our societies are illegitimate, this legitimizes any act that violates its rules.
If the system of law becomes tyrannical, breaking the law becomes an act of rebellion.
Survival outside the system means rejecting its conventions, boycott Jewish money by accessing your resources directly without it.
Barter is dead, so what other option is there?
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=661825f821b95
AntiPostmodernist 0 points 4 weeks ago*
And how are they doing, comparative to us?
If you want a loving wife, kidnapping is also a viable option, the caveman method is simply extremist traditionalism.
Stockholm syndrome is natures way of making the most direct honest and to the point method viable over the long term.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=661825f821b95
AntiPostmodernist 0 points 4 weeks ago
Britonian myth influenced by Celtic myth influenced by Norse myth influenced by Roman myth influenced by Greek myth influenced by Egyptian myth influenced by Mesopotamian myth.
Learn about perennialism. One cradle of civilization with one mythology gives rise to many descendant civilizations with their own descendant mythologies.
Christianity came from the same source.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=660a0bc72aa01
AntiPostmodernist 0 points 1 month ago
Installgebtoo wiki
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=66155ebeb83c1
AntiPostmodernist 0 points 1 month ago
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2012&version=KJV
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=660a0bc72aa01
AntiPostmodernist -1 points 1 month ago
I'm not advocating for paganism nor for lgbt. I advocate for a paradigm that is actually dangerous to the global establishment. The kind we created on b all those years ago in 2003-2013.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=660a0bc72aa01
AntiPostmodernist 2 points 1 month ago*
The Bible had been changed many times since it was first written. King James is one of the most respected versions of the Bible and also the most heavily embellished.
We have find the origins of many biblical passages due to archeology, and the Bible we see is a frankensteinian stichjob where many kings and other influential figures just added, removed, or changed parts of the book to suit the political climate of their day. It's the exact opposite of what you describe it as.
The Bible had ceased to be modified now but Christian practice today has certainly not abandoned this quality to itself.
Christians are constantly changing what it means to be Christian or to practice Christianity, again the biggest factor is whatever the most powerful or influential figures within Christian circles thinks wouod best suit them politically.
You have no holy book, you have no religion, and the influence of Christianity had been catastrophic in that it gave us both the right and the left.
Communism is people practicing Christianity as the Bible commands, but with the exemption of God. The morals of the typical libcuck atheist are based on enlightenment period moral philosophy where they wanted to create a way for people to follow the moral teachings of christ without worshipping him.
I'd say that the moral teaching of Jesus was a lethal poison to begin with, the momment we accepted the ideas we were doomed.
That weakness was a strength to be lauded and strength was a weakness to be ashamed of or guilty for. "The meek with inherit the earth, the rich shall not enter the kingdom of heaven" vs "You white folk better apologize for colonizing us".
But worse was that we should care about the happiness and suffering of all people. That's a Christian stance that the philosophers transformed into ideas like utilitarianism and deontology, they were just recreating christian morality without reference to christ.
There was good reason that Neitzsche saw that the Communists and the Christians were the same when it came to what their moral paradigms were.
The pre-Christian moral paradigm begins not with some higher moral law, or the good of mankind, but with the good of oneself, and from that we derive the good of certain others whom we care about such that their happiness is our own, or whose benefit pays dividends to our own benefit, or to that of the aforementioned loved ones.
The dirty secret of Christians within the nationalist sphere is that their religion is inherently incompatible with nationalism, they are commanded to care for all of mankind, and so they cannot put one subset of men before another while still being faithful to Jesus.
Nationalism requires a basis in egoism, that sees the good of oneself as the highest good, if not the only one, as stated before, following the path that seeks to optimize one's own happiness and pleasure while minimizing one's own suffering and misery naturally leads to nationalism as an extension of this philosophy.
Either it's a result of "I care for my family and friends, and so their happiness is my own", or "I am a white man, so anything that privileges whites over non-whites or men over women is to my own benefit", or "I love my own people, but I don't feel quite the same about that other group of people who are unlike me".
Christianity prevents one from being a nationalist by virtue of its very nature, only ignorance or deliberate rejection of its teachings can allow one to be a nationalist of the ethnic variety.
We can see this in the rhetoric of Christians within nationalist circles, they judge of character rather than on skin color, being more concerned with the actions of members of groups rather than their DNA.
For me it's all about the 14 words, I care only about the existence of White people, their children's futures, and also for the utilitarian ratio with regards to those of the White race - by maximizing their happiness & pleasure, while minimizing their suffering & misery.
If observed biblically Christianity is communism with the addition of God, and communism is the attempt to follow the moral and political ideas of Christianity without the presence of God.
In Christian vs atheist debated it often comes down to two guys that agree om what is good and evil, to the point that there's no question of whether something like racism is morally wrong or something like women's rights are morally right. Instead they accuse each other of not sufficiently adhering to the moral standards they both agree upon.
The places where they have their differences are insignificant trivialities.
Now, an egoist moral paradigms accepts that there is not one universal standard by which good and evil could be judged, everyone has their own ideas about what is good or evil since it is based upon how it makes them feel personally. Good and evil become synonymous with good and bad, as in, they are matters of individual preference, subjective valuation.
Egoism is in this way a school of moral relativism. But that's not to say that it advocates that you refrain from making your judgements and acting upon them.
To the contrary, the central view of morality from an egoist perspective is that the evolution of morality is all about conflict between competing moral viewpoints, and the elimination of the ethical preferences of the weak by those which are held by the strong. Its a world of warring viewpoints.
Everyone has their own set of things which make them feel happy or sad, they desire to cultivate the conditions that make then happy, and to prevent the conditions that make them sad, desire and fear.
It's all about the neurochemicals that reward our brains with pleasurable feelings when we are in circumstances that are good for increasing the number of organisms with genetic similarity to ourselves.
Our brains also punish us with neurochemicals that make us feel painfully under circumstances where it is more likely that the number of genetically similar organisms would decrease.
FYI it's not just the matter of our survival and procreation, but that of our closely-related kin or phenotypically-similar folk as well.
We are monkeys on juice, all motivated by the pursuit of the same chemical highs, and avoidance of the same chemical lows, we just all want these things for ourselves, and have chosen different proxies for getting them.
Each perspective is different, and so this naturally leas them into conflict, egoism advocates that each individual fight to impose their view and get their way, the best man wins and trains his life moral victory with an actual victory of outlasting the guy with the competing view.
Proponents of the concept of an "objective" morality like to conflate moral subjectivity with permissiveness and a refraining from casting judgemnt or acting to enforce one's own ideas of ethical conduct upon others. Something egoism is actually all about.
They do this despite Christian doctrine commanding them to withhold judgment of others and punishment of their crimes.
Or probably becaue of it, in my history I've seen that every accusation made against another is potentially a confession of being guilty of the same kind of charge they've laid against another.
Its a coping mechanism as well as a way of distracting others from the failures on ther own end, by identifying them in another. Too bad it's become predictable.
The Christian types love to huht down pedophiles on the left, and accuse their secularism of facilitating the sexual crimes perpetrated with minors, however they have a dirty secret in that the Bible does not condemn sexual relations with children, and that wouldn't be an issue except that the Bible does lay out some pretty extensive prohibitions with regard to sex laws, the lack of an issue with child-fucking was a very prominent absence.
Christians may try to say that the Bible has a rule forbidding child marriage, but I couldn't find it anywhere.
Pagans love to talk about the degeneracy of the modern west, but ignore that pagan myths are all pretty much d-teir degenerate shut.
I'm talking incest, pedophilia, vore, bestiality, transgenderism, necrophilia, and more, all with a heavy dosage of rape throughout.
/d/ could make an animated porno that is filled with the most fucked up fetishes where there a multiple scenes of animals raping women, where it is not even the most deviant sexual elements in there - and it is just literally the mythology of pre-Christian civilizations within Mesopotamia, the Nile Valley, The Middle East, Greek-Roman, Norse-Germanic, Celt-Briton, and Slavic lands.
They'd just let the many sexual scenes play out as they likely had.
And the Bible was written by peole who took so many of the stories of pagans, then changed them a bit to make their owm stories.
As stated before, the Bible had been changed many, many times, the original versions were probably just as deviant as the pagan myths were, but over time those elements were played down, likely one of the reasons being the need for the precursors of Christianity wanting to distinguish their religion from those of the pagans whose stories they'd used as a basis for their own mythology.
Another cause might be an increased fear of disease and new measures put in place to lessen the likelihood of people being ill or otherwise disabled.
I mean, they would have noticed the consistencies among those who had frequently gotten sick or conceived babies with infirmities, and those who hadnt. They didn't need to two the cause or mechanisms specifically to observe that peopw who ate pork tended to get the shits more often than those who hadn't.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=660a0bc72aa01
AntiPostmodernist 0 points 1 month ago
Imagine you write a story, then someone takes a concept from your story and uses it to name a concept that fits with it, and then a third person invents an occasion associated with that event.
Easter is a celebration of vernal rejuvenation, where the seasons cease getting colder and begin to het warmer instead, they linked this concept with fertility because of all the pregnancies that were likely resulting from men and women being stuck inside due to the cold weather, also it seems like everything is being reborn, so like winter is associated with death, spring is associated with birth.
If there ia a goddess of fertility, any holiday in her honor is likely to be celebrated in this season.
As the sun rises in the east, we could associate it with all the above concepts, it wouod make sense to name it accordingly.
Everything about the gods embodied their concepts, and they were often named for the concept they represented, in turn, concepts these gods personified and related phenomena were often named for the gods to which this was attributed as a part of their domain.
Basically, it's not unlikely that the holiday could be names for the direction or the goddess, or that the direction could be named for the goddess. All such things are a strong possibility.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=660a0bc72aa01
AntiPostmodernist 0 points 1 month ago
Eostre and Istar are the same damn goddess. It's jew nonense to take a difference in spelling or pronunciation and make it out to be the locals talking about something different. They did the same with jack the rapper's graffiti talking about the jeus being avenged, and made a case about how it's not talking about the heebs because it's spelled different. Years later and DNA confirms the identity of the ripper to be a kike immigrant from poland that wanted to kill british gentile whores.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=660a0bc72aa01
AntiPostmodernist 2 points 1 month ago
Many Catholic apologists have taken their lessons on rhetorical bullshiting from the kikes. No wonder they got better as the universal house of christ got closer and closer to the jew world order. Seriously, the amount of yid influence in the Vatican is staggering.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=660a0bc72aa01
AntiPostmodernist 0 points 1 month ago
It's aa good as the economy is. By which I mean the way things are for me depends on how the economy is doing, I'm in the stateside now because Canada is fubar.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=65563dcce4517
AntiPostmodernist 8 points 1 month ago*
International students and other "newcomers" create large homeless populations of White Canadian citizens due to how they get into entry level jobs and then bring their families into the same business, filing them up with their relatives from the home country.
They are gatekeeping access to the entirety of the employment options in Canada for those who lack the qualifications to get anything other than the jobs that anyone should be able to attain.
The jobs market is getting blockaded for White Canadians without the work history to get into post-entry jobs by mostly South Asian, MENA, and Sub-Saharan African immigrants.
Most of these immigrants are completely ignorant of the harm they are causing, they are surprised that we don't have family members who are willing to support us by sending us money and providing us a place to stay, as is the case for pretty much all of them. Thats the thing with these immigrants, none of them are homeless or broke, they have money coming in so even if they don't have a job in Canada they are totally fine, and if everything gets bad for them just fuck off back to their country, taking anything of use they acquired while here back along with them.
Most White Canadians who get their first jobs do so through connections because that's the only way to get your first job. If you are a White guy on the streets without any connections, you are pretty much fucked when it comes to getting work.
Most homeless here are White citizens who are willing to work but unable to, eventually they fall into crime and drug use.
They burn out inevitably, and this is accelerated by the fact that the city itself seems to hate them, they are not allowed to sleep in a place that is warm and comfortable for long, the shelters are such an absolute hellhole that most unhoused avoid then like the plague, entering them only as a last desperate resort.
I see the idea of turning to crime to better oneself as 100% legitimate and justifiable, and I see revolutionary action as totally okay in the exact same light.
/v/NewsoftheFucktards viewpost?postid=6609d6239ff9d
AntiPostmodernist 3 points 1 month ago
Mexico has a large white population, their are Spanish speaking Hispanics of Spanish descent, but they are pale to fair skinned, and European featured, with hair and eyes of colors other than black and brown. 100% "caucasian".
/v/TrailOfTacos viewpost?postid=6609f783b9bf8
AntiPostmodernist -1 points 1 month ago
The only people he preached to were jews as well, he explicitly excluded non-jews from receiving his message, and for them he had a separate message: that they be the loyal and obedient slaves and sefvants to the jews.
Even this story is not the win you think it is once you consider what it was exactly that was happening in the context of this event.
He whipped the changers of money and merchants outside the temple steps because Jewish law forbade commerce within the grounds of the houses of worship.
He was enforcing Jewish law upon jews and called the God of the Jews his father.
He was reforming the practices of the jews to make them more consistent with their own religion, so as to lead then back to their roots, but then with the added twist of then calling him their messiah speaking of himself as the direct son of God, which had been conceived with a (married and teenaged) mortal woman.
The fact that his mother was married to Joseph meant that Jesus was a bastard and thus not immaculate, one of the many things that hurt his claims to being the messiah.
Jesus had a brother, born to Joseph and Mary he had a better claim to being the messiah than his more famous brother did, because one of the prophecied qualifications for being the messiah was to be born of the line of David, but Jesus could not make that claim of himself as Mary was not of the one of David, Joseph was.
Claiming that God was his father instead of the man who had raised him actually hurt his chances of being accepted as messiah.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=66097cac6d2b4
AntiPostmodernist 0 points 1 month ago
Best put.
/v/ClownWorld viewpost?postid=6604b287b4791
AntiPostmodernist 1 point 1 month ago
Those who point fingers tend to be the ones most guilty of the charges they launch against others.
Rule #1 of dealing with accusations should be this.
Very first thing you do, is always investigate the accusers for the kind of crimes they lob accusations at others for.
/v/ClownWorld viewpost?postid=6604b287b4791
AntiPostmodernist 5 points 1 month ago
Nobody talks about young girls getting raped by women.
Thing about female pedophiles is that when they go after boys, they are rarely ever true pedophiles, going after boys who have yet to begin the process of puberty, which occurs at 8 years on average.
They tend to go after boys well over the age of eight, when their bodies have already begun to enter into the process of puberty, making then hebephiles, not pedophiles.
Or they go for teenagers, who are either in the late stages of finishing up their puberty development or have already completed the process of reaching sexual maturity and adult stature, making them ephebephiles.
But when a lesbian/bisexual woman molests a girl, true pedophilia is a lot more represented among them, in fact, it's more popular for them to go after prepubescent girls (whom they could better groom and control) than to go for teenagers (who are more difficult to manage, and more likely to become chatty).
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=66056c575ff69
AntiPostmodernist 0 points 1 month ago*
So we're going with the second there.
Almost everything is unnatural then, as social norms change along with the rest of society.
If we're talking about modern society, both pedophilia and racism are unnatural, deviant, and they both run counter to popular social norms whether you're on liberal or conservative side of the aisle.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=65fb062f5fa02