THE REASON THEY ALL DESIRE WHITE GENOCIDE IS THAT WE ARE THE ARISTOCRACY AND ALWAYS HAVE BEEN.
Without us they can return to Levantine degeneracy.
Man prefers to be an animal, and we force his transcendence into gods against his will.
We must understand our achievement and revel in it.
And return to it.
Source date (UTC): 2016-08-31 04:01:00 UTC
http://vidmax.com/video/145126–WhiteLivesMatter-Atlantic-Jihad-The-History-of-White-Slavery-by-Their-Muslim-Oppressorshttp://vidmax.com/video/145126–WhiteLivesMatter-Atlantic-Jihad-The-History-of-White-Slavery-by-Their-Muslim-Oppressors
Source date (UTC): 2016-08-29 15:31:00 UTC
CULTURAL OBSERVATIONS
Man yelling at waitress for disrespecting him. Waitress not being offended but assuming he’s not thinking clearly. This is one of the great differences between the culture of status and blame we have in america and the one that was ancient, but that the soviets imposed upon all. You can say “i did the right thing as I understood it” but you cannot say “you are a bad person and I am above you”. This “appeal to reasonableness” is a superior means of argument and you see it in certain classes but not in others. Why? It’s a big ‘shame’ in america to fail in thinking, but not a big shame to fail in business. In this country it’s the opposite. Its normal to fail in thinking – you just need to be understood – but it’s not ok to fail in business – they assume you’re a crook.
If we had rule of law here it would be a much superior society than that of the west.
Source date (UTC): 2016-08-28 05:34:00 UTC
French women still seek to build grace the best.
Germanics do pride with out pretense well.
Northern Protestants are too humble.
The slavic women,on sunday, for church, can retain their feminine beauty into old age.
The slavs and nordics have the best frames – they are less outbred. The nordics a bit heavier masculine bias, and the slavs a bit fairer feminine bias.
Men – we measure ourselves largely but the quality of our women.
Source date (UTC): 2016-08-28 04:40:00 UTC
YOu can tell the scandinavians here. Thicker hair, different facial structure, and get fat a lot easier. yep.
Source date (UTC): 2016-08-24 11:51:00 UTC
BUMS HANG AROUND US CIVILIZED FOLK …. For the simple reason that they’re safe around us, and not each other. The world is a dangerous place when we don’t make it otherwise.
Source date (UTC): 2016-08-24 09:36:00 UTC
Q&A: CURT: AND SOCIAL CAPITAL IN EUROPE?
—“Would you also say, sir, that Europe’s Scientific and industrial Revolutions were the result of this high trust/social capital, as opposed to the prevailing narrative that colonialism = industrial/scientific revolution? It’s always been a theory of mine that social capital is what allowed Europe and Western Civilization to accelerate ahead of other Civs, which runs contrary to the Guns, Germs and Steel narrative”—
Well, the tradition was there in the 700’s when the Friesians started immigrating to land in England. And by 1200’s Bacon had studied this contractualism and invented empiricism. And starting about the same time they started aggressively hanging vast numbers of troublemakers, and restoring the trade that would become the Hansa (Germanic) civilization.
So my view is that the colonial expansion ARRESTED the growth of germanic north sea civilization, and that while there was amazing wealth generated in England, France, holland, Spain, and Portugal by this switch from north sea to Atlantic, that the reason for the division between germanic and English civilizations that culminated in the world wars, was this catastrophe we call colonialism.
Now, Americans speak English, but we separated from England before England split from germanic civilization. The majority of American whites are from germanic decent. And the majority of anglo whites are from pre-Germanic split. So that is why we have the language of the English and a culture more Prussian-like the germans.
And in my opinion, from what I’ve seen throughout history, as far as I can tell, the industrial revolution would have occurred in northern Europe just as it nearly occurred in Athens. England blew up just like Athens for the same reason – overreach.
If you have an empirical society, with enough literacy, and enough cultural capital, you will eventually produce innovations, since there is no opportunity to survive and compete by parasitism.
In other words, if we create rule of law we will continue to evolve. We have no choice. It’s the societies that dont create incremental suppression through natural law that stagnate.
Becuase it is too easy to develop stagnating-corruption and parasitism.
Source date (UTC): 2016-08-24 07:23:00 UTC
THOSE WHO FIGHT WITH ME SHALL BE MY BROTHERS
(To continue to agitate my racist friends a bit)
He who fights with me shall be my brother.
I may not want him to marry my sister, nor may he want me to marry his. But together, as brothers in arms, we create for one another the ability to make that choice. Apart, we do not. And this is but one of many choices we have or do not have if we fight or do not fight as brothers.
So he who fights with me for sovereignty, property, family, tribe, and nation shall forever be my brother. There is no more to be said.
Western Aristocratic Egalitarianism enfranchises All Men Who Fight As Brothers to preserve property and sovereignty for families, into the initiatic brotherhood of soldiers upon taking the irrevocable Oath.
I see no color between brothers, only in the preservation and expansion of beauty of all colors within families who fight for property and sovereignty as defenders of self, property, families, tribes, and nations.
Yes, our different tribes and races possess different adaptations. These are mostly in the distribution and sophistication of intellectual gender traits: masculine space, and feminine language. Yes we mature more and faster, and less, and slower. As such some of us are more pliable younger and longer, and others less pliable both younger and shorter. And as such more impulsive and less.
But given that our differences are largely in the size of our underclasses, caused by our regional success at reducing them; and given the challenges of limiting the harm done by them, thereby inhibiting the good done by most of the rest, if then we help those that have greater problems domesticating their underclasses, and they help us by domesticating their underclasses, the differences between us with gradually reduce, and we can all transcend into the gods we seek.
I do not hate on those who do not harm me and mine. And evidence of history is that small nations do least harm, and large empires do most.
Source date (UTC): 2016-08-24 04:57:00 UTC
When I go into a store, say, and am not followed around by security, I’m given the opportunity to steal. By foregoing that opportunity, I’m bearing an opportunity cost, and in so doing, paying for my privilege, and at the same time, maintaining it as a commons for others like me to enjoy.
When I am pulled over by a policeman, and am polite and cooperative rather than belligerent and reactive, not only do I purchase a better outcome for myself, but for everyone who resembles me (in whatever way.)
Every time I seek to do my share, rather than to shirk; to pay my way, rather than to free ride; to give, rather than take; I pay into the privilege bank. I can only ever cash in a fraction of that. But if I can count on others like me to do likewise, we all come out ahead.
Now, if someone would be willing to bear those costs, but their coethnics are not, or are less willing than others, that’s unfortunate for them.
But if they demand the same privilege, it is they who are demanding something unearned, and that their coethnics have not demonstrated a willingness to pay for, or at least an equal willingness to pay for. They are demanding that others take a risk for their benefit in extending them privilege; one that has not been shown to be a good risk but rather, a bad one, one not worth the cost of taking.
If you want privilege, then pay for its construction as a commons. But do not attack those who do and demand that they share their privilege with you, and offer nothing in return.
Now some might object that this is “collectivism” or “collective responsibility” and we should instead only judge anyone as individuals.
But that is not a reasonable objection nor a reasonable suggestion.
I don’t hold anyone accountable for the misdeeds of people who resemble them. But I can’t necessarily tell them apart. There is a cost involved in telling them apart. It takes time, effort, energy, resources, etc… And even then, there is risk, because it’s not foolproof.
Now, if someone doesn’t want to be profiled, or discriminated against, there are three ways they can realistically attack this issue.
They can help make it easier (and therefore less costly) for me to distinguish them from less reputable elements by using signals (dress, mannerisms, speech etc…) which demonstrate that they are not a threat, that they are successful, reliable, etc…
They can increase the value of what they can OFFER me so that I have more incentive to invest in telling them apart.
Or they can suppress the misbehavior of the disreputable element within their community themselves to reduce the NEED for me to tell them apart; to reduce the risk for me of failing to tell them apart.
But to simply demand that I presume they are not part of that element, when I have no way of knowing whether they are part of that element or not, is to demand that I take a risk. And even if that risk is a good risk, and worth my while in their case, that demand includes the demand I extend the same benefit of the doubt to all others. And that is not worth my while.
This is, so far as I can tell, an accurate and truthful (though not necessarily full) account of what social justice warriors are talking about when they talk about “privilege.”
It’s nothing to be ashamed of. And when they rally and shame you over your privilege, they are behaving as a spoiled child behaves when it throws a temper tantrum, and for the same reason. They want you to give them something but they don’t want to give you anything in return. So they resort to moral, emotional and social blackmail, hoping you will give them what they want to leave you alone.
But they never will leave you alone, because as long as this method works, they will never quit using it, never quit making demands, never quit throwing tantrums like bratty children.
Never give in.
Reposted from Eli Harman:
Privilege as a Commons
When I go into a store, say, and am not followed around by security, I’m given the opportunity to steal. By foregoing that opportunity, I’m bearing an opportunity cost, and in so doing, paying for my privilege, and at the same time, maintaining it as a commons for others like me to enjoy.
When I am pulled over by a policeman, and am polite and cooperative rather than belligerent and reactive, not only do I purchase a better outcome for myself, but for everyone who resembles me (in whatever way.)
Every time I seek to do my share, rather than to shirk; to pay my way, rather than to free ride; to give, rather than take; I pay into the privilege bank. I can only ever cash in a fraction of that. But if I can count on others like me to do likewise, we all come out ahead.
Now, if someone would be willing to bear those costs, but their coethnics are not, or are less willing than others, that’s unfortunate for them.
But if they demand the same privilege, it is they who are demanding something unearned, and that their coethnics have not demonstrated a willingness to pay for, or at least an equal willingness to pay for. They are demanding that others take a risk for their benefit in extending them privilege; one that has not been shown to be a good risk but rather, a bad one, one not worth the cost of taking.
If you want privilege, then pay for its construction as a commons. But do not attack those who do and demand that they share their privilege with you, and offer nothing in return.
Now some might object that this is “collectivism” or “collective responsibility” and we should instead only judge anyone as individuals.
But that is not a reasonable objection nor a reasonable suggestion.
I don’t hold anyone accountable for the misdeeds of people who resemble them. But I can’t necessarily tell them apart. There is a cost involved in telling them apart. It takes time, effort, energy, resources, etc… And even then, there is risk, because it’s not foolproof.
Now, if someone doesn’t want to be profiled, or discriminated against, there are three ways they can realistically attack this issue.
They can help make it easier (and therefore less costly) for me to distinguish them from less reputable elements by using signals (dress, mannerisms, speech etc…) which demonstrate that they are not a threat, that they are successful, reliable, etc…
They can increase the value of what they can OFFER me so that I have more incentive to invest in telling them apart.
Or they can suppress the misbehavior of the disreputable element within their community themselves to reduce the NEED for me to tell them apart; to reduce the risk for me of failing to tell them apart.
But to simply demand that I presume they are not part of that element, when I have no way of knowing whether they are part of that element or not, is to demand that I take a risk. And even if that risk is a good risk, and worth my while in their case, that demand includes the demand I extend the same benefit of the doubt to all others. And that is not worth my while.
This is, so far as I can tell, an accurate and truthful (though not necessarily full) account of what social justice warriors are talking about when they talk about “privilege.”
It’s nothing to be ashamed of. And when they rally and shame you over your privilege, they are behaving as a spoiled child behaves when it throws a temper tantrum, and for the same reason. They want you to give them something but they don’t want to give you anything in return. So they resort to moral, emotional and social blackmail, hoping you will give them what they want to leave you alone.
But they never will leave you alone, because as long as this method works, they will never quit using it, never quit making demands, never quit throwing tantrums like bratty children.
Never give in.
Reposted from Eli Harman:
Privilege as a Commons