Mission

The Dark Enlightenment is simply the scientific method applied to politics, society, and religion – resulting in a big pile of highly unpopular bad news, that people are different from each other, that races are different from each other, and that the sexes are different from each other being a major part of that bad news.

Neoreaction is a political program (largely inspired by the Dark Enlightenment) for restoration – to recover western civilization and rebuild Chesterton’s fences – racism, ethnic states, and patriarchy. Israel should be Jewish, and America should not be Jewish. That does not imply that America should murder and rob all Jews in America, any more than it implies that Israel should murder and rob all non Jews in Israel – but it is fine if Israel murders and robs any non Jews in Israel who are determined to take political control of Israel away from Jews. The Old Testament position on non Jews in Israel is reasonable, commanding tolerance and hospitality for the stranger in the one case, and mass slaughter for the stranger in the other case. One should neither be a cuck on the one hand, nor avoidably multiply enemies on the other hand.

The alt right is everyone who is literally worse than Hitler and has decided to laugh about it. Needless to say, one alt rightists is literally worse than Hitler for one reason, and another alt rightist is literally worse than Hitler for a different, and often entirely opposed, reason.

One of the Eldar listed various missions for Neoreaction:
1. Vaisya Political Party of Soldiers — try to get a combination of numbers and power to actually take over USG and end democracy, or at least democracy with universal suffrage. I favor rule by a semi hereditary class of officer aristocrats, but Trump as God Emperor to be succeeded by his sons, or a republic with franchise limited to fighting men and males with property and children would also be good. Anything is better than a democracy in which we are bound to be permanently outvoted by a bunch of stupid parasites.
2. Vaisya Political Party of Priests — Build an out-of-power state church, ready to be adopted by Vaisya who take power. Provide the ideological justification for a Trumpist or soldier takeover, so that they won’t feel bad about themselves for doing so, and will have something to replace the Cathedral with if they do take over.
3. Subversive Brahmin Political Party — figure out someway to bring reactionary ideas about by appealing to disaffected Brahmins and doing an inside job. But Brahmin rule tends inevitably to produce the results it has been producing. Rule by the holy results in holiness competition, and here we are.
4. Mutual Aid Society/Fraternity/Meta-church/Asimov-style Foundation — provide a support system for helping red-pilled fathers or would-be fathers surviving the decline. Produce a religious political sect where mutual support between males supports male authority over women, so that in four hundred years or so, the foundation remains, and the Cathedral has quietly vanished. The plan is not to win power in the near future, but to survive the coming social collapse and dark age preserving something from which Western Civilization can be rebuilt. Observe that the high fertility of Orthodox Jews reflects a social order that demands that women give way to men, etc. This not only increases the fertility of the Orthodox Jews, but everyone who has substantial interaction with them, since they demand that all women, not just Orthodox women, give way. Similarly, Saint Paul on various methods for keeping female social status down. This plan is to maintain normal families in the here and now, and in the distant future, in a world where normal families are pretty much illegal. If we can have patriarchal families, we win in the long run, since the non patriarchs vanish, and our descendants survive. Men who believe in old style marriage and patriarchy get together socially and have social events in which the proper role of women is socially enforced. Notice that the Mormons also arrange for Mormon women to get together and have social female events – from which events a woman is excluded if she fails to behave.
5. Antiversity — an institution dedicated 100% to finding the truth. If all the smart people quietly believe the Dark Enlightenment, while merely giving lip service to progressive pieties, one day there is a preference cascade, and suddenly it is revealed that all the elite is quietly red pilled. Infogalactic is a good step towards this. I have set my browser to redirect Wikipedia links to Infogalactic links, and I recommend you do also. Infogalactic explicitly commits to observable truth, rather than official truth and official spin.
6. Poolside at the decline — just continue to live life, and maintain a select circle of smart, red-pilled buddies to correspond with and occasionally have a beer with. Die with no children, or thirty children that are half South Asian. This position accepts the end of western civilization and the white race as unavoidable. We shall drown, and no one will save us. Our race, and our greatness, will not be remembered, nor will we have descendents to remember us. The next civilization will find a few strange, ancient artifacts, and will be astonished to find the ruins of ancient machines on the moon, wondering who put them there.

182 Responses to “Mission”

  1. Pseudo-chrysostom says:

    Just as its fine for America to murder and rob any non Teutons in America who are determined to take political control of America away from Teutons.

    • jim says:

      Not supposed to say that out loud.

      • viking says:

        yeah but its kind of telling that the biggest potty mouth in the farthest right reaches of political incorrectness cant bring himself to use the inverse example but rather ironically gives the jews permission to use ovens in the interest of jewish nationalism. the phrases internalized self hate and false consciousness come to mind. Im not accusing, or necesarilly advocating, its just that when one reads that passage of yours the the incongruity is deafening.

        • Alfred says:

          I thought it was kind of obvious that the readers is supposed to fill in the blanks.

        • peppermint says:

          There’s really no need for Jim to say that though, you can get all the GTKRWN you want from The Daily Stormer and The Daily Shoah. Fash the Nation wishes it was half as good as the insight here but mostly contents itself with current events.

          • Jack Highlands says:

            It’s the whole bundle in the fasces that makes it strong. Spencer provides personal courage, Anglin energizes the troll army, Weev protects the infrastructure, Sven is that rare but refreshing combination of modesty and true artistic talent and Enoch reminds us that even people as smart as Sailer and way smarter than Cernovich no longer need to cuck one bit (except for the big one I guess: anonymity – you have to listen to Enoch off TDS and the bantz to realize how smart he really is and why Sven defers to him so much on TDS).

            But of all our younger best, Jazzhands is the most likely next one to make a professional career of this stuff: he’s well organized, energetic, has political experience and contacts, and provides the key type of current affairs podcast. There are only so many ways to intellectualize developments, but practical politics is an eternal fountain of activity to keep people focused while we await the next step. I think he needs to speculate a little more on the Machiavellian, House of Cards side of all this though. Hope he’s reading our host here.

            • egregious philbin says:

              well said – i agree 100% – the TRS/TDS & FTN folks are impressive & knowledgable (especially once one gives in to the humor). i was born in the late 50s/am in my late 50s & am very pleased to have found these podcasts within the last year – for most of my life nothing like this was available – now there’s red ice, TDS, FTN, paul kersey, molyneux, greg johson, richard spencer, etc. i could occasionally read things i agreed with (e.g., amren in the 1990s, jensen/rushton articles) but could not ever hear these things actually discussed out loud by humans who held the same beliefs (same knowledge of the data!) as we do. it has been reinvigorating.

        • Theshadowedknight says:

          The incongruity is deafening? Sounds to me like Jim’s meaning was loud and clear. If everyone hears it, does it really need to be said?

          Hard for leftists to cry Holocaust and deny the Jews a home in the same breath. Hard for Jews to “Fellow White People” and deny their own right to exist.

          The Shadowed Knight

          • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

            The implied message was certainly there, i just felt it necessary to highlight it because for many cuckservatives, Israel is a curious sort fetishistic totem, upon which they project their repressed manly instincts, through which they live vicariously, being dildoed and ballgaged by the whipholders they snivel up to at home.

            • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

              That impulse, like many conditioned impulses of babel’s tower who’s rhizomes run through peoples brains (often without conscious notice), requires more explicit highlighting and pushing on to more fully rout out.

            • Aodh Mor MacRaynall says:

              Man, do you have that right. You don’t know how many baby-boomers I know that look on Israel with longing and say things like “Yep, them Jew-boys can fight.” But they jump and squeal like little girls when their wives crack that pussy-whip.

              • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

                The funniest thing about it is that israel would have ended up overran a long time ago anyways without the extensive US support it has received, be it in form of money, or equipment, or training, or technology, or geopolitical favors.

                As negro in chief would say, ‘you didn’t build that’.

                The myth of israeli competence was Made In America(tm).

        • Wagner says:

          I’m with viking – Jim could easily up the ante on incarnating the frothing scumbag archetype. He’s inherited Moldbuggian moderation, though, and that has its place too.

        • vxxc2014 says:

          “when one reads that passage of yours the the incongruity is deafening.”

          Yes like a Thunderclap is deafening.

          Give Jim credit you have no idea how much of a leap that is…

          Not to mention if you’re going to do something or point out the necessity it’s better left unsaid. Really. That sort of contract is 1% verbal and 99% non-verbal. Really.

      • vxxc2014 says:

        Yeah I was gonna say….

      • Alrenous says:

        Christians expected the mercy and tolerance toward their enemies to earn God’s hand on the scale, compensating for the tactical inadequacies.

  2. t says:

    as a real brahmin, some issues that we faced…

    (1) we had the caste system, which is actually quite good, assessed by how long it has been around.
    (2) this did not stop the same issues from occuring. you may have heard of it. we call it Buddhism. this is the hindu version of your christian progressivism.
    (3) Due to the influence of ‘non-violence’ type left signalling, hindu india was left defenceless. What followed was predictable.
    (4) nearly 1000 years of slaughter, from the 8th century onwards. first the huns, then the muslims. almost enough to make one say oy-vey. let me give you an example. the himalyays become the hindukush ranges past india. ‘hindu’ is obvious, but ‘kush’? this directly translated to blood or kill. as in the mountains that killed lots of hindus.
    (5) as a person who has benefited from the cultural output of the west, well, best of luck.

    you will need some form of caste system, as proposed above. it may not be enough.

    • thinkingabout it says:

      Tamil Nadu and Bengal were on the periphery of Ancient and Medieval India – their culture was strongly influenced by the culture of the Northwestern and Central Indo-gangetic plain. The artifacts from that period indicate that Tamil nadu and Bengal were poorer than the Hindu heartland in the north and west. And yet, in the current era, the six non-Peace Nobel laureates from India are from Tamil Nadu and Bengal. And people from those two states, especially Brahmins, are acknowledged to be smarter than those from the West and North.

      Goes to show you just how much human capital India probably lost in the Islamic invasions. The mass murders were carried out in cities, and so the smartest, most ambitious, most creative types were wiped out. The only hindus left in the north and west after Islam’s arrival were rustic villagers.

      Similar story with what happened to Iraq/ Baghdad after Genghis Khan.

    • jay says:

      Does your caste system allow rare extraordinary men rise through the ranks?

      • thinkingabout it says:

        India’s caste system traditionally allowed castes with high abilities, solidarity and a high proportion of extraordinary individuals to rise through the hierarchy. Individuals, not so much. Because individualism is a very recent addition to the Indian social lexicon.

        Most of India’s historical empires were founded by someone from a lower caste, who rallied his caste and some allies to overthrow the established rulers. Then, the new ruler’s brahmins would sacralize the now-dominant caste by inventing a mythology that proclaimed their descent from some illustrious hero or god.

        This process happened even within the various brahmin subcastes. The Maratha empire that defeated the Mughals was initially founded with the guidance of one brahmin subcaste. There was another subcaste of brahmins, allegedly descended from survivors of a Jewish shipwreck on western India, which started to gain influence over time. The second subcaste usurped power, and to this day the first subcaste considers them impure and not-quite-as-good.

        This system allowed for a staggering degree of stability. Rome was overthrown when barbarians invaded and deposed the emperor. India got invaded by barbarians multiple times from the Northwest, with multiple imperial dynasties put to the sword, but it remained Hindu. Each barbarian conqueror was rapidly Hinduized by the brahmins. It was a win-win for both sides, until the pagan barbarians were replaced by Islamic barbarians. Muslims don’t want to be sanctified by brahmins, they want all the brahmins dead.

        • Cavalier says:

          While what you say may be true, it is also true that genetics show Indian castes to have been extremely endogamous for at least 3,000 years. The castes are less like separate economic or social classes and more like separate races.

          • thinkingabout it says:

            True. The penalties for caste mixing were very harsh, shunning was common. In the more remote areas there are even occasional honor killings for inter-caste marriages. Interestingly, the lower castes resent outmarriage just as much as the higher castes do, because each caste has its own form of caste-pride and wants to maintain endogamy.

            Overall, I think it was a good thing. It prevented the men of the top castes from shagging all the other castes’ women. Which might have triggered rebellion and resentment.

            Look at America today. A few alpha whites and football blacks are lusted after by the vast majority of women. Large numbers of men, especially East and South Asians but also many whites, blacks and hispanics, are left on the bench. And conversely, black women are forced to stand by and watch the best of their men being snagged by blonde temptresses. East Asian women are still a tiny minority, but anywhere they’re present in large numbers, white women see them snagging a lot of their men.

            Heartiste has a theory that somehow smart men marrying hot women is good. I don’t agree. Like Jim says, we’re producing much fewer geniuses now than we were a hundred years ago – and looking at Jews tells you why. Without strictly enforced endogamy, successful Jewish men will marry a hot dumb subservient Asian or White girl over a frumpy but brilliant Jewish girl. And attractive Jewish girls will go for the swaggering quarterback over the nerdy Yeshiva boy. With predictable declines in the intelligence of their offspring.

    • vxxc2014 says:

      No we have to kill our living enemies dead.

      He doesn’t want to say it but the inverse of what he blessed – and he is blessing exactly the inverse – is an enormous step and Bravo .

  3. Rollo says:

    “Die with no children, or thirty children that are half South Asian. This position accepts the end of western civilization and the white race as unavoidable.”

    Jim, isn’t this annoyingly binary to you, that the white race is so or it is not so? Perhaps in 200 years the continent of Europe averages 90% European; But that ignores distribution completely. Ile de France may well be 20% European, but Limoges? Would Duisburg be as Turkish as southern Poland?

    Additionally, left-voting whites are predisposed a) race-mixing b) terribly

    • jim says:

      All right thinking people accept a moral obligation to import four hundred million black male military age Muslims screaming for infidel blood and white pussy.

      A few places, notably Australia, have rejected open borders, but they still have rates of legal immigration that will abolish the white race in a century or so. Once nonwhites gain an electoral majority, they will vote in extremely harsh measures against whites. Just look at how they vote today.

      • vxxc2014 says:

        Then we dispense with democracy and go with whatever is necessary to survive.
        Which we will. There’s too many of us to vanish. Especially since we’re awake and roaring mad.

        I prefer Starship Troopers with power base broadened by broadening the franchise to cops, firefighters, EMT and anyone who risks their lives getting the franchise, parasites are out.

    • Cavaliers says:

      High-end progs are the people most obsessed with race and breeding and status. Of all groups they are the people least disposed to race-mixing. Hell, they hardly even leave the capital cities. It’s the christcucks who try to out-prog the progs by actually squatting in the dirt with the subhumans, actually adopting them, actually fucking them.

    • Cavalier says:

      High-end progs are the people most obsessed with race and breeding and status. Of all groups they are least disposed to race-mixing. Hell, they hardly leave the capital cities. It’s the christcucks who try to out-prog the progs and end up actually squatting in the dirt with the subhumans, actually adopting them, actually fucking them.

      • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

        LOL nope dude. Where do you think Eliot Rodger came from.

        Ideally, I think miscegnation should be legal, but under the current leftist system Asian Americans are going to die out way before Whites do.

        • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

          Miscegenation is child abuse.

          • thinkingabout it says:

            This is the truth. I was in a relationship with a very attractive very submissive Vietnamese girl but I just couldn’t go through with it. I couldn’t take away a sense of identity and belonging from my future children by making them mongrels with no home except globohomo centers like NY, SF and LA.

            • Cavalier says:

              Half-gook children wouldn’t have been any more or less rootless than white children. The last yeomanry have died off, farming as an occupation is dead, small towns are dead, and suburbanites are nearly as rootless as the rootless cosmopolitans.

              Your real problem would have been flushing your gene pool down the toilet.

          • Corvinus says:

            Pseudo-chrysostom…

            “Miscegenation is child abuse.”

            No, it is not. It is a decision made by people. Stop being an overdramatic little girl.

            thinkabout it…

            “I couldn’t take away a sense of identity and belonging from my future children by making them mongrels.”

            We are ALL mongrels. Most Americans don’t have pure blood.

            Cavalier..

            “Your real problem would have been flushing your gene pool down the toilet.”

            You’re parents must be proud of you, considering your own hormonal therapy and genetic reprogramming. You becoming less human every single day.

            • pdimov says:

              Child abuse is also a decision made by people.

              • Corvinus says:

                Except that a white man and an Asian woman who marry and have a child, for example, is NOT committing child abuse. That is a figment of your imagination. Were you properly taken care of during your formative years?

                • pdimov says:

                  You were setting up a false dilemma between something being child abuse and being a decision made by people.

                • Corvinus says:

                  “You were setting up a false dilemma between something being child abuse and being a decision made by people.”

                  You are creating an entirely new category of child abuse.

                  This is your “logic”…

                  Child abuse is a decision made by people.
                  The decision made by people to have race mixed kids is child abuse.
                  Thus race mixed kids are the result of child abuse.

                  Except…the definition of child abuse is the “physical maltreatment or sexual molestation of a child.”

                  Except… the subsequent birth of a child is the result of two people having intercourse. There was no physical harm or sexual deviance committed by the parents, direct or indirect, on the newborn during that act.

                  Again, you are creating an entirely new category of child abuse.

            • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

              “We are ALL mongrels. Most Americans don’t have pure blood.”

              LOOOL. speak for yourself.

              “No, it is not. It is a decision made by people. Stop being an overdramatic little girl.”

              A decision that results in substantial higher probability of divorce and kids growing up crazy.

        • Cavalier says:

          When I think of high-end progs, I’m not thinking of Hollywood or Silicon Valley, I’m thinking of New England.

  4. Rollo says:

    “Die with no children, or thirty children that are half South Asian. This position accepts the end of western civilization and the white race as unavoidable.”

    Jim, isn’t this annoyingly binary to you, that the white race is so or it is not so? Perhaps in 200 years the continent of Europe averages 90% European; But that ignores distribution completely. Ile de France may well be 20% European, but Limoges? Would Duisburg be as Turkish as southern Poland?

    Additionally, left-voting whites, and their non-white urbanite brethren, are predisposed a) race-mixing b) terribly low fertility. Wouldn’t marriage to a non-white, or a race-mixing urbanite white, predispose your lineage to out-breeding and low fertility?

    I propose oppositely, that neoreactionaries should aim to marry into a family that is a) rural, and b) fertile. Is there any reason that is poor advice relative to the above-quoted?

    • Cavalier says:

      The smart and attractive youth leave their Bumfuck, Nowhere for “the city”. Do this for a few generations and see what sort of people are still living in the hinterlands. We’ve on generation number 3 or 4, and the results are already incredible. Good luck finding your not-dumb, not-ugly, not-inbred, not-meth-riddled girl in the country—you’ll need it.

      • jim says:

        The best people go to the big cities, and do not reproduce.

        • Cavalier says:

          Correct. Which means, if you’re looking outside the cities, you’re looking in the wrong places.

          • jim says:

            Surveyed Silicon Valley. Zero marriageable women. If a man is planning to have a wife and children, no alternative but to hit up more rural and provincial places.

            • Samson J. says:

              Yes, I don’t know why it seems lost on a lot of commenters I read, on various sites, that there’s a large continuum between NYC/Toronto/London/wherever, and the middle of nowhere, South Dakota.

              I agree that one likely won’t have much luck in a hamlet of 500 people, owing to sheer numbers, but there are plenty of women in somewhat bigger towns/smaller cities that grew up in the country and would love to get back there.

            • Cavalier says:

              For an engineer, none. In higher strata, some, though in proportion to the total population of a city they may as well not exist.

              For really top shelf genes, may have to bite the bullet.

              Samson notes the gradient of cities, but there’s a reason everyone wants to live in the same few places, and presumably many, especially those at the top, succeed.

              • jim says:

                Trump met Melanie in New York City, but she had been recently imported from a small town in Slovenia, which makes Trump not all that different from a Silicon Valley engineer taking a year off to cruise small towns in eastern Europe for chicks – the difference being that Trump’s organization brings the Eastern European chicks to him.

                • Cavalier says:

                  Eastern Europe is a different animal. The Iron Curtain held back time, in a sense. Progress, you might say, was delayed for a good half-century.

                  And as you say, Trump met Melania in New York, showing that that city’s gravitational pull, already spanning oceans, had extended well into the backwaters of Eastern Europe not more than 5 years after the Soviet Union’s disintegration.

              • Samson J. says:

                *there’s a reason everyone wants to live in the same few places*

                But dude, not everyone wants to live in the same few places. There are tens of millions of people in your country content not to live in the huge megacities. I know an electrical engineer content to work at a lumber mill in a town of 1000 people.

                • Cavalier says:

                  Take 1,000 random flyover Americans, wave your magic wand, tell them that they can choose to move to [insert high-status city of their choice here] and your magical djinni powers will ensure that their income increases, their status increases, they are initiated into the cool kid clique, and their mating prospects adjust proportionately to their new station. See how many turn you down.

                  “I know a guy…”

                • jim says:

                  The problem is that if you are a smart man and move to the high status city, your income increases, your status increases, you join the cool kid clique, and your mating prospects nonetheless go to hell in a handbasket.

                  There are no marriageable girls in Silicon Valley, unless, like Donald Trump, you ship them in from small towns in Eastern Europe.

                • peppermint says:

                  Mating prospects in the city are unmarrigable White women, Asian women (I know so many intelligent White men who married Asians), and various mystery meat. Some of the mystery meat will be a possibility very soon when we start moving chromosomes around in egg cells, because a lot of the mystery meat has living White relatives and White parents who were drawn in to metrosexuality.

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  I have lived in several parts of the world, huge cities and small towns, and on a range of incomes. Living standards and status are remarkably unresponsive to income. In expensive places there is nothing you can afford, and in cheap places there is nothing to buy. Status is more a function of the ability to take status than actually having it; it is very clear when you meet someone who could plausibly be a general or a minister even if he is living in a box. I know plenty of men with attractive girlfriends who have no visible means of support, and are not criminals nor on welfare, but simply spend very little, and don’t outwardly appear much different to any other high status person.

                  The country lifestyle has few real drawbacks, given attractive women.

                • harambe says:

                  “The country lifestyle has few real drawbacks, given attractive women.”

                  Apart from that, Mrs. Lincoln…

                  (I don’t disagree. though.).

                • Anon says:

                  >The problem is that if you are a smart man and move to the high status city, your income increases, your status increases, you join the cool kid clique, and your mating prospects nonetheless go to hell in a handbasket.

                  So meet a suitable girl before moving to the high status city, preferably a smart one who either didn’t live in a big city before or was capable of behaving themself. I understand that this isn’t common or even feasible for most people but it’s doable.

                  What passes for the cool kids clique in high status cities is a joke anyway. Very few of those working in high status, well-paying jobs are not as smart as people would like to think, rather they are grossly incompetent, and extremely dorky.

                • Anon says:

                  Should be “Very few of those…are as smart as people would like to think”

                  Egg, face, etc. Cromwell’s post above is spot-on as well.

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  Living standards are low in the cities. You need to earn millions per year before you can reproduce a suburban lifestyle in Manhattan. When we had real aristocracy, they maintained an office in the city and a real home in the country.

                  So what does Manhattan pay in? Access to high quality women, who are very rare in the country, and very hard to meet in suburbs.

                  The functional life plan is to move to the city, meet a quality woman, and then get her out of the city. If it takes more than a year to persuade her to leave the city, try again with another one. If she is older than 25, don’t even bother.

        • Cloudswrest says:

          Indeed. As you’ve mentioned before, they’re called “IQ shredders.”

  5. Y. Ilan says:

    Your best chances in the long term would be a Foundation. Fighting civilizational cycles seems a bit hubristic, bound to fail.

    • peppermint says:

      The Foundation was on an irrelevant unsettled planet, and realistically, this government will not give us even that. But the Left isn’t invincible and isn’t even intelligent.

    • thinkingabout it says:

      Both Hinduism and Confucianism have had renewals after being subjugated and going into decay. I don’t think it is bound to fail.

  6. bob k. mando says:

    OT: Narcissist-In-Chief avoids accusations of Stolen Valor by ordering his subordinate to award him a medal

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/04/president-obama-awards-himself-distinguished-public-service-medal/

  7. Robert says:

    We are building point 4 at http://www.knightsofthewest.com

    We are a fraternal order for men of the west in North America.

    Traditional Christianity has everything that you are looking for already in place, all we have to do is remember it.

    • Steel T Post says:

      If only there were means to remove the Jewish leaven.

    • jim says:

      What are you doing to socially enforce patriarchy on women?

      • thinkingabout it says:

        Do you even think that is possible, once the horse has left the barn? Or is the only solution replacement by a more patriarchal culture, like orthodox jews and mormons? Or, god forbid, the Arab pedophile cult?

      • Robert says:

        I can only really answer that as far as I am personally concerned. The Knights have not gotten big enough to form complete communities, but we continue to grow, at this point it is just a vehicle for forming male friendships, for the formation of the mannerbund.

        It is impossible to enforce patriarchy via social pressure when the society around you is anti-patriarchy. You have to attempt other methods, or you have to get a different society.

        The biggest advantage that most of us men have is financial, I do not have a joint bank account with my wife, I control all the money. I think this has gone very far in keeping my family patriarchal, she has to literally ask me for money.

        I also attend a very conservative evangelical church and my family attends church regularly, so we are not in the mainstream society, but a more patriarchal branch. This is yuge because I can always appeal to the highest authority and he is very clear.

        “Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.”

        “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.”

        • peppermint says:

          My woman has her own income and I still have total control over her, because women are biologically programmed to behave in this way towards the man who grabs her ass.

          I conjecture that the reason so many marriages failed in the 20th century is men were told not to touch their wives and that it’s perverted to hold her arms behind her while doing stuff. Women need physical reinforcement, not just of good behavior, but also of marriage. Marriage is not two souls becoming abtrusely bound, it is two Aryans and some oxytocin.

          Biology: 3
          Philosophy: 0

          • Cavalier says:

            In this context, the immortal soul is a metaphor for the eternal genes, and soul-binding is a metaphor for genetic recombination.

            Are you net-fertility-positive yet?

        • Steel T Post says:

          Sweet Jesus, even the Bible’s “Good Wife” can handle money. “She considereth a field, and buyeth it…” (Proverbs 31)

          But as for using the Bible as a marriage guide, it’s generally not all that helpful to Europeans. Jews are rather different than Europeans, as Kevin MacDonald shows in a helpful chart titled “TABLE 1: CONTRASTS BETWEEN EUROPEAN AND JEWISH CULTURAL FORMS” from the preface of his text “Culture of Critique,” here: http://web.csulb.edu/~kmacd/books-Preface.html

          Free yourself from the (((Culture of Critique.))) Biology trumps fantasy.

          • Robert says:

            You both (peppermint and Steel T Post) bring up good points.

            peppermint:
            I think it would be accurate to say that my wife views me as an alpha, so maybe some of the problems that others have we don’t. But I think it is unrealistic to assume that each and every man can be, or I should say, should have to be, alphas to have a secure marriage. In that scenario you would have a bunch of women chasing a few men, not a really good scenario for building civilizations.

            Steel T Post
            If all else were patriarchal then I would agree with you. Currently men with wives face an uphill battle, always pushing against a fallen society, they have precious few tools left.

            I find that your hypothesis is disproved by history, and is a little absurd. Was not the most successful period in our peoples history that period when we were most Christian? Did we not have secure marriages for ages under Christianity? Read the diaries of the captains of our race, most all of them were devout, and found purpose and meaning in their acts through their faith. I am under no false impression that biology is not real and does not significantly affect our behavior, but it is a double edged sword. Are you telling me that all the fat white tattooed purple hair girls are a European culture?

            • peppermint says:

              Jim gets this wrong too, he thinks a man needs the right to whip his woman for her to see him as her alpha. Women aren’t dogs.

              Marriage is a biological state I’m which the married couple can’t keep their hands off each other and wouldn’t want to touch anyone else, this is biologically enforced through behavioral traits including hormones and stuff.

              The other comparisons of marriage to a contract, or to a binding of “souls”, or women and men to pack leader and beta dogs, are analogies to this truth.

              Obviously women enjoy being “taken” somewhat violently and stair to shit test you when they’re horny. This means they want to be nailed, not whipped without being nailed.

              The most important thing about a marriage is the marriage bed, the man and the woman attending to each other’s sexual needs and need for companionship. A marriage without a man, a woman, and some oxytocin is not a marriage

              • peppermint says:

                (Of course, natually, where natually means according to old English law, the patriarch has the right to do whatever to a woman except for murder or mutilate or sodomize her unless she leaves, and she can charge him with thus injuring her if she had physical evidence of injury)

              • Robert says:

                I won’t speak for Jim, but my opinion is that it is unrealistic to think that most men will be alphas in the eyes of their woman at every moment of their lives. Or that the man and woman “can’t keep their hands off each other and wouldn’t want to touch anyone else.” The evidence for this being unrealistic is enormous (mainly, a bunch of divorce and a bunch of adultery). It sounds like you have a good relationship with your woman, that is great for you, but there are a great many men and women who have a great many issues that you don’t have. The current solution to that is divorce, which I do not believe is a good solution, and the solution of “Well they should all just be alpha like me” is in my opinion, not realistic. We are not animals, we are men. We do better when we are organized, when we try to control certain things. It seems like you give oxytocin a little too much power. Is not what you are advocating similar to what the hippies were advocating?

                • jim says:

                  It is entirely trivial to ensure that men are alpha in the eyes of their wives every moment of their lives. Make sure the authority of the husband is backed by society.

                  It should be actually illegal for a wife to be disrespectful to her husband – not because we want state intervention within the family, but to provide an environment where it is socially unacceptable for a wife to be disrespectful to her husband. It should be legal for a husband and a father to give appropriate and proportionate physical discipline to his wife and children.

                  It should be legal to kill someone for sleeping with your wife, and illegal, and subject to the death penalty, to allow or compel your wife to sleep with someone else. It should of course be illegal, and subject to the death penalty at the husband’s discretion, for a wife to sleep with someone else.

                  It should be illegal for a woman to have authority over a male past puberty, except of course that a mother has authority over her son. Thus illegal for female teachers to teach male students, etc.

                  Under these circumstances, every husband would be alpha in the eyes of his wife, and his wife would not be able to keep her hands off him, and our TFR would skyrocket to about six or so.

                • Corvinus says:

                  “It should be legal to kill someone for sleeping with your wife, and illegal, and subject to the death penalty, to allow or compel your wife to sleep with someone else. It should of course be illegal, and subject to the death penalty at the husband’s discretion, for a wife to sleep with someone else.”

                  Then by your own admittance of sleeping with other men’s wives -and- with women who are other than your wife without the father’s permission, you should be dead.

                • jim says:

                  Unowned women are fair game.

                  The problem is that unowned women are a commons, and a commons gets abused. The solution to the tragedy of the commons is to propertize it, not to call on men to virtuously refrain from abusing the commons.

                • peppermint says:

                  Being alpha all the time is not necessary. Physical touch and reasonable sounding aspirations are how cringing beta queer commies keep their women happy.

                  Adultery and divorce only became common in the last century. Men and women were perfectly happy with marriage before then.

                  Try listening to more Taylor Swift to better appreciate how women actually feel about marriage in this fallen world.

                • peppermint says:

                  Corvinus, do you want to institute the patriarchy Jim describes? Go tell one of those women’s father’s to challenge Jim to a duel over her honor or marry her.

                • peppermint says:

                  One of the most common things women complain about from their exes is that they were controlling. Until I took control of a woman by gazing in her eyes and whispering the three little words, I had no idea how easy to control they are. They are programmed to be able to tell exactly how you feel about stuff no matter how much you try to hide it and remember everything you tell them.

                  They do need to be pushed down and nailed sometimes, though, and they need you not to whine or act cowardly in front of them – weakness is forgivable but not cowardice.

                  If they required their man to be the local alpha at all times no Whites would be able to live in cities or hook up with office workers. But it is probably true that women don’t want babies except if they feel like their man is a winner, which prevents Whites from breeding in cities or reproducing with those office workers.

                • peppermint says:

                  …maybe the reason collapsing societies are so fascinated with a androgyny is if it’s the woman’s choice all the way just having fun no big deal then the aging young men don’t have to consider that they’re playing with women, what women are and what it means for them.

                • peppermint says:

                  Androgyny and faggotry make sense as male strategies to take advantage of unowned women, but what leads men to let their daughters run around? Possibilities include compulsory education, teenage daughters being designed to be hard to control if you’re not offering them an obvious alpha, and maybe the daughters of dead men go to the cities to be used.

                • Cavalier says:

                  Which three little words, peppermint? “I own you”?

                • jim says:

                  “You are mine.”

                • Steel T Post says:

                  Robert: “We are not animals, we are men.”

                  Wrong. Humans are animals in the Great Ape family.

                  • Kingdom: Animalia
                  • Phylum: Chordata
                  • Class: Mammalia
                  • Order: Primates
                  • Superfamily: Hominoidea (Apes)
                  • Family: Hominidae (Great Apes)
                  • Tribe: Hominini
                  • Genus: Homo
                  • Species: H. sapiens

                  As Jim calls it, “simply the scientific method applied to politics, society, and religion – resulting in a big pile of highly unpopular bad news.”

                  You might need to take a dose of that humility you were handing out earlier, and accept the reality that you’re an animal, with “no advantage” (Eccl. 3.19) over animals. Oxytocin and dopamine are your GNON.

                • Cavalier says:

                  The bad news is not that there is a human species; the bad news is that there are multiple human species.

                • Corvinus says:

                  “Unowned women are fair game.”

                  Jim, you can’t even keep your lies straight. ALL women are
                  owned in a patriarchal society, since fathers possess and control their daughters. In this context, possess refers to property. Daughters are the property of their fathers. Fathers secure specific permission from those men who wish to take their daughter’s hand in marriage. Thus, any man who has sex before getting married and during their marriage with another woman will incur the wrath of God.
                  Thus, there is no observably no such thing as “single” women or “unowned” women.

                  “The problem is that unowned women are a commons, and a commons gets abused. The solution to the tragedy of the commons is to propertize it, not to call on men to virtuously refrain from abusing the commons.”

                  The Bible does NOT support your perverted view. Men as the protectors of civilization and as the champions of agency MUST “virtuously refrain from abusing the commons”. You lose AGAIN, Jim.

                  Philippians 4:8–Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.

                • jim says:

                  Jim, you can’t even keep your lies straight. ALL women are owned in a patriarchal society,

                  That is the objective, but never entirely achieved in practice. No matter how little power the law gives women, nature gives them far too much power.

                  The state, society, and the family can decree that all women should belong to some man, but making it actually happen is another thing altogether.

                  “The problem is that unowned women are a commons, and a commons gets abused. The solution to the tragedy of the commons is to propertize it, not to call on men to virtuously refrain from abusing the commons.”

                  The Bible does NOT support your perverted view.

                  In the seventeenth century and much of the eighteenth century “rape” primarily meant dating a woman without the consent of her parent or guardian. In the Book of Ruth, Boaz acquires ownership of Ruth as if she was a sheep, book of Ruth, Chapter 4. If consent had been required, there would have been a ceremony formally witnessing it. See also the marriage and rape laws of Deuteronomy 22 and Exodus 22, where it is perfectly clear that consent is not legally required, and that rape and seduction are equally crimes against the owner of a woman, not crimes against a woman.

                • Steel T Post says:

                  Invoking the Bible is not necessarily appropriate for Europeans. The desert tribes who wrote the Bible and Qaran are strikingly different from forestland Europeans in terms of sexual relationships, as Kevin MacDonald has shown. See Table 1: “Contrasts between European and Jewish Cultural Forms,” here:

                  What Makes Western Culture Unique?
                  Kevin MacDonald
                  http://www.kevinmacdonald.net/WesternOrigins.htm

                  To suppose that the Bible equally applies to all people is to assume that all peoples are somehow equal.

                • jim says:

                  Well then, if you don’t like me invoking the bible, how about I invoke England from 1660 to about 1800.

                • Corvinus says:

                  “That is the objective, but never entirely achieved in practice. No matter how little power the law gives women, nature gives them far too much power.”

                  No, Jim, you’re not going to weasel you’re way out of this one. You as a Christian male are BOUND to individually observe the Christian patriarchal laws and customs regardless if current society today puts up “barriers” that restrict or prohibit those things. That is, in this particular situation, you MUST secure the permission from the father in order for you to take his daughter’s hand in marriage and then fuck her brains out. ALL women are owned by their fathers. That is standard operating procedure. You don’t get to say “Well, since father’s aren’t really doing their job in owning their daughters, they are single, and I get have sex with them without being subject to God’s rules or by circumventing my own moral code.”

                  “The state, society, and the family can decree that all women should belong to some man, but making it actually happen is another thing altogether.”

                  YOU, as the protect of white civilization and of true Christianity, MAKE it happen by adhering to God’s will in any and all circumstances. You don’t get to jump off the bandwagon merely because modern American families don’t abide by patriarchal standards. YOU have a duty to honor it regardless. YOU show moral leadership. YOU demonstrate agency.

                  “In the seventeenth century and much of the eighteenth century “rape” primarily meant dating a woman without the consent of her parent or guardian.”

                  No, Jim, we’re staying on point here. We’re not talking rape and dating. Did you get permission from your girlfriend’s father or oldest male relative to marry her? Because having sex without his consent is punishable by death since you are not married. You only “own” her once there is a ring on her finger, Jim. And there is NO sex outside of marriage between a Christian man and a Christian woman.

                  “In the Book of Ruth, Boaz acquires ownership of Ruth as if she was a sheep, book of Ruth, Chapter 4. If consent had been required, there would have been a ceremony formally witnessing it.”

                  Totally irrelevant here, Jim. Not going down your rabbit hole. If you are having sex with your girlfriend as unmarried Christians, you are both living in sin. If you did not secure permission from her father or oldest male relative to marry her, you ought to be stoned to death.

                  “See also the marriage and rape laws of Deuteronomy 22 and Exodus 22, where it is perfectly clear that consent is not legally required”

                  But it is SOCIALLY required, Jim. Verbal consent by the father. Have you done that?

                  “and that rape and seduction are equally crimes against the owner of a woman, not crimes against a woman.”

                  If you haven’t sought consent or haven’t been formally granted consent, the onus is on YOU. You don’t get to take her because no consent has been granted, regardless of whose duty it is to offer it. He didn’t inform you, and you didn’t ask. She is STILL owned by the father.

                  You are having sex outside of marriage with an owned woman without permission. Congratulations, you are going to be put to death. Remember, YOUR logic, not mine.

                • peppermint says:

                  Corvinus, I have a better plan. You will be put to death for your insane equalitarian lies, and Jim will be honored for his accomplishments in this ridiculous century of souls and jews.

          • Steel T Post says:

            Robert, using your “logic,” the most successful period of US history has been while women could vote. We made it to the moon while women could vote. We won the Cold War while women could vote. Therefore, women voting is now an essential part of our culture that cannot be questioned. If you’re not convinced of that, don’t feel bad when I’m not convinced by your argument, ok?

            And no White man ever need a Jew to save him. You can take that to the bank.

            • Robert says:

              I am against women voting, as are most traditional Christians, and I don’t judge success by rockets, and we didn’t win the cold war. It is hard to say when and where was the most successful period of our (Europeans, not the US only) civilization, I would probably say sometime during the British empire?

              Why are you so anti-Christian? Our true salvation comes from God, Jesus Christ came on behalf of God. If you are in prison and your dad sends a Jew to break you out of prison, are you going to say no thanks? Men are not gods, we all have fallen short, we all have sinned. It is good to humble yourself before the creator of the heavens and the earth.

              • Steel T Post says:

                Like Jim says, “The Dark Enlightenment is simply the scientific method applied to politics, society, and religion.” Ok, we’re going to apply ¡Science! to religion, as follows:

                1. You are not going to live forever. Like Ecclesiastes says, you have no advantage over animals. But now we’ve got ¡Science! to back up a once-prominent Sadducee’s opinion. “The Myth of an Afterlife: The Case against Life After Death” (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2015)

                2. But we do understand now, via Terror Management Theory (TMT,) why you want to live forever, and why humans invent stories about living forever; it ameliorates your mortality salience, i.e. anxiety about your inevitable annihilation. ¡Science! “Two decades of terror management theory: A meta-analysis of mortality salience research” Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2016)

                3. It takes HUMILITY to accept that you aren’t going to live forever, and accept reality. ¡Science! See: “A Quiet Ego Quiets Death Anxiety: HUMILITY as an Existential Anxiety Buffer” (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2014)

                Humility, Robert? Try it once.

                * * * *

                P.S. Again, I’m so glad you mentioned humility.

                “The ontological fallacy of expecting a light at the end of the tunnel, well, that’s what the preacher sells, same as a shrink. See, the preacher, he encourages your capacity for illusion. The he tells you it’s a fucking virtue. Always a buck to be had doing that. And it’s such a desperate sense of entitlement, isn’t it? Surely this is all for me. Me. Me, me, me. I, I. I’m so fucking important. I’m so fucking important, then, right? Fuck you.”

                –Rust Cohle, True Detective, Season 1, Episode 3
                http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTnNsIgQArM

                • glosoli says:

                  Atheists are so boring.
                  You should go read Koanic’s proof of the existence of the supernatural.
                  Your *belief* in science is more ridiculous than my belief in God and His Son. One has produced centuries of improvements in human behaviour, the other has produced the nuclear bomb, and napalm.
                  Once man decides he’s free of God and his laws, Satan is free to ply his evil trade.
                  A moon landing? Sure, great.
                  You actually think you won the cold war?
                  Heh, all your institutions are belong to them, and you will sink within 20 years. Losers.

                • glosoli says:

                  ‘Like Ecclesiastes says, you have no advantage over animals.’

                  This is not true.
                  http://biblehub.com/commentaries/pulpit/ecclesiastes/3.htm

                  It is clear that MOST men are like beasts. The only men that aren’t are those with the humility to submit to Christ, and live according to God’s laws. That is all that separates us from the beasts.
                  A good(ish) attempt to distort the Bible’s meaning, typical of those who submit to Satan. But not so good as to be true. God bless you.

                • peppermint says:

                  》 You should go read Koanic’s proof of the existence of the supernatural.

                  state it faggot

                  》 Your *belief* in science is more ridiculous than my belief in God and His Son. One has produced centuries of improvements in human behaviour, the other has produced the nuclear bomb, and napalm.

                  u wot m8

            • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

              “We made it to the moon while women could vote. We won the Cold War while women could vote.”

              Why didn’t you mention these follow ups?
              “We got ethnically cleansed from our neighborhoods while women could vote. We get our tax rate increased from 8% to 45% while women could vote. We had our savings lose 98% of their value due to inflation while women could vote. We saw our fertility drop to below replacement levels and our smartest women turned into cat ladies while women could vote.”

              While I am more moderate than Jim in that I don’t believe women should be property once they have demonstrated independence and left their father’s control, the fact that you can defend women voting is why your version of white nationalism is fundamentally left-wing and cucked. Women voting is a terrible idea that immediately began wrecking civilization with stuff like Prohibition and the New Deal.

              If you support women voting you implicitly support the destruction of the white race in order to not hurt the feelz of white women. Only under a proper libertarian or more right wing approach like that of the Ming dynasty can the non-black races reproduce.

        • Cavalier says:

          “It is impossible to enforce patriarchy via social pressure when the society around you is anti-patriarchy.”

          If you’re going to construct your own community, you have to construct your own society. You will have to control the meme flow; you will have to cut off the TV, the news, large swaths of the Internet, and fully secede from the public schools. It isn’t that “it’s impossible to enforce patriarchy via social pressure when the society around you is anti-patriarchy”, it’s that the social pressure you are capable of mustering is dwarfed by the cumulative social pressure of TV, public schools, other Cathedral memetic transmitters.

  8. Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

    Jim, I’m guessing the list of missions is from best to worst in your own ranking? Pinochet style coup formalized by monarchy is most likely solution in my opinion. Did you change your opinion on the likelihood of the Trump coup?

    • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

      Also I think the Cathedral is thinking the same way you are. https://www.thenation.com/article/trumps-cabinet-is-a-coup-waiting-to-happen/

    • Samson J. says:

      *I’m guessing the list of missions is from best to worst in your own ranking?*

      Perhaps, but I didn’t at all read it as suggesting that they’re mutually exclusive, but rather that there’s something for everyone; a role that plays to everyone’s strength. It’s great stuff – action-oriented; if you’ve been wondering, as I used to, what you can “do”, here you are: work towards one of the above and bide your time until it’s Time.

    • jim says:

      It is intentionally random.

    • Corvinus says:

      This is why I love this site. Jim creates a hierarchy using the Indian model, with his version being ultimately arbitrary and vague, that will inevitably result in millions of white men objecting to its forceful implementation, as touted by egghead pontificators.

      Talk about a permanent class of leaders who would bleed dry the masses dry! Yet, when push comes to shove, how does one ensure this utopian society be created? Indoctrination by the Alt Right through picture books geared toward elementary school children?

      No, by Chink and Chong’s course of action–“Pinochet style coup formalized by monarchy is most likely solution in my opinion.”

      How? By whom? When? See, if you are going to have these pie in the sky ideas, it would be best to have at least a rudimentary process in place rather than making a grandiose statement. Do YOU even have the fortitude to act like a high T, high time preference strongman like Pinochot? Or do you pretend on Call of Duty Rambo style?

      Monarchy and patriarchy are dead issues for Americans. It’s mental masturbation to dream that if and when there a race war or the financial collapse of the United States, that from the ashes these philosophies will be the result of the “reboot” on a large-scale.

      • Oliver Cromwell says:

        Effective institutions are dominate by selection; no effort or will is required to bring them about.

        We are not discussing whether there will be patriarchy and monarchy (or whatever you call effective corporate governance) in the future. All we are discussing is whether we and our families will lead the triumphant resurgence, or be exterminated in the collapse of the American empire’s matriarchal mobocracy.

        The second outcome is much more likely, only receiving less attention for reasons of pragmatism.

      • peppermint says:

        People don’t like the words monarchy and patriarchy, but love the words accountability / skin in the game and marriage and family.

        They also like democracy but fear populism.

        Perhaps we will never have a monarchy, but as the left dissolves we will have more accountability in government, more marriage, and more populism.

      • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

        LMAOOO this site has even turned Corvinus into a racist.

        Corvinus, if you think the current state of soaring debt and unpayable health care / social security liabilities, dysgenic, below-replacement fertility and massive ethnic conflict is in any way sustainable you need to get your head checked. Pinochet style coup is the most effective way to get rid of the worst parts of the left. Chile used it, China used it, Singapore used it, and if a civil war is to be avoided the Anglo countries will need to use it.

      • jim says:

        Yet, when push comes to shove, how does one ensure this utopian society be created? Indoctrination by the Alt Right through picture books geared toward elementary school children?

        If we were counting on winning elections it would be difficult. Fortunately elections have been increasingly irrelevant for quite some time.

        Did anyone vote to bring in millions of black male Muslim military age Somalis and dump them in marginal electorates in flyover country?

        The current story about the “the Russians hacking the election” only makes sense as part of an effort by the permanent government to deny the God Emperor power.

        Bring it on! Burn the Reichstag.

        • Corvinus says:

          “Fortunately elections have been increasingly irrelevant for quite some time.”

          If that be the case, white males collectively would NOT be running for office or voting. For YOU, elections are irrelevant, but not for the masses.

          “Did anyone vote to bring in millions of black male Muslim military age Somalis and dump them in marginal electorates in flyover country?”

          That wasn’t a voting decision. That was the exercising of liberties by individuals and groups, chiefly religious organizations who embrace humanitarianism under God’s work. Why do you hate God?

          “Let us see what happens with a King who promises his soldiers faithful and obedient pussy.”

          It’s NOT going to happen. There will be no king. There will be no public call for men to get all the poon they want free of charge. Wake up and switch hands.

          Oliver…

          “Effective institutions are dominate by selection; no effort or will is required to bring them about.”

          Corrected for accuracy–Institutions are created by a group of people who demand services, are willing to abide by its rules and regulations, and select those most qualified to manage them through a wide range of criteria. You’re fucking brain dead.

          “All we are discussing is whether we and our families will lead the triumphant resurgence, or be exterminated in the collapse of the American empire’s matriarchal mobocracy.”

          Who is this “we and our families”? Are you ever going to get off your ass and work towards this noble endeavor rather than complain about it?

          Reactionary…

          Haven’t you heard, there is NO such thing as racism or sexism anymore. So you got triggered. I suggest you find your safe space.

          • Steel T Post says:

            > “…chiefly religious organizations who embrace humanitarianism under God’s work. Why do you hate God?”

            Exactly.

            The Great Commission to save Africa has miserably failed, so now we must import them to gain status with the ever watchful (((Jesus))). Wouldn’t want a supernatural Jew pissed at us.

          • pdimov says:

            “That was the exercising of liberties by individuals and groups…”

            As they emptied clip after clip into him, his last thought was that they were just a group of individuals exercising their liberties.

      • jim says:

        Monarchy and patriarchy are dead issues for Americans

        It is always the current year until it is not. Let us see what happens with a King who promises his soldiers faithful and obedient pussy.

      • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

        *low time preference

  9. Walter Alter says:

    Trevor Blake pointed me to your blog. Good stuff but flawed in that “dark enlightenment” is still clinging to the coming apocalypse. News flash – no apocalypse. So the cynical faction of the DE will end up obsolete soon as some of the tech we’ve been oogling hits the vertical ramp of the catenary curve. Ideology (all of them) is/are in a period of Hegelian synthesis. The best ideas from all points on the compass will amalgam into something driven by observational logic for the first time in history a la Systematic Ideology. It will become the new gestalt background to human affairs because it can morph forward, anticipate itself in a neo-form, not from reaction (old school) but from anticipation, a reading of far more accurate maps amplified by human-AI interface. The future will become unutterably cool.

    DE needs to understand and predict from this phenomenon: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/style/2016/12/07/when-every-moment-of-childhood-can-be-recorded-and-shared-what-happens-to-childhood/

    • jim says:

      If no apocalypse, then dark age decline at about 1% a year. We have serious levels of dysgenesis, both in the west and in east asia. The technologies you are fantasizing are not going to happen, because the number of geniuses we are producing is falling like a stone. Our smartest people are just not as smart as the smartest people we had in the early part of the twentieth century.

      • Anon says:

        Won’t genetic engineering make genius a commodity for those who have enough money to tinker around in the near future? I’d say it’s more likely than any substantial breakthroughs in AI (“muh self-driving cars”).

        • Cavalier says:

          With rudimentary fetus selection alone, we will very shortly be able to raise everyone by 1SD with ease. This would increase the number of people with 160+ IQs by 18 times.

          • Cavalier says:

            *the number of people with 145+ IQs

          • jim says:

            Yes, progress in genetics continues, and the one area where we have real nanotech is DNA reading machines, so maybe DNA tech will save us.

            But our ability to predict fetal IQ from DNA is at present woefully bad, and it is not obvious there are going to be huge improvements.

            • Cavalier says:

              16 years ago, the Human Genome Project spent 3 billion dollars producing the first genome sequence. Today, it can be done for 1 thousand. I fully expect to have my own personal sequencer machine in my garage in 10 years.

              Predicting IQ from DNA alone is an enormous task, but very simple. No technological revolution is necessary to make it happen—simply feed the computer a bunch of data and let it spit out the results. If physicists tend to have one specific allele more than retards, it gets put in the “do want” database, and the reverse, etc.

              Throw in CRISPR and you don’t even need to predict IQ, you can give everyone an extra 15 points simply by isolating 3 or 4 alleles of equivalent potency to the Tay-Sachs one. If you’re CRISPRing everyone, you can make everyone heterozygotic, so the disease doesn’t matter.

              You’re right to be horribly pessimistic in most things, especially modern scientific things, but this isn’t one of them. I will have genetically engineered children.

              • jim says:

                It is likely that there are a very large number of rare harmful alleles of small effect.

                In which case even if we survey everyone in the entire world, hard to identify those alleles.

              • jim says:

                you can give everyone an extra 15 points simply by isolating 3 or 4 alleles of equivalent potency to the Tay-Sachs one.

                And the potency of heterozygous Tay-Sachs is?

                Every positive allele we find tends to disappear under further examination. If we gave everyone all the positive alleles we now know about with reasonable confidence, would not make a whole lot of difference. Maybe this situation will improve, but improvements have not yet been forthcoming.

                • Cavalier says:

                  Cochran says Tay-Sachs is worth 5 IQ points.

                • Cavalier says:

                  If all else fails, there’s always cloning. I challenge you to find a good reason not to have a couple dozen Feynmans, von Neumanns, Oppenheimers, Newtons, Franklins, Shockleys, Bismarcks, and Darwins running around.

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  Cochran also mentions “spell checking” which is simply giving a person the dominant allele in the population (or the one that’s shown the most dominant population sweeps) for every gene loci.

                • jim says:

                  It is likely that would work, and would produce enormous benefits – godlike humans – but that would require an enormous number of edits – by current standards an impossibly huge number of edits. But the required editing capability may well be within reach soon.

                • glosoli says:

                  @Cavalier,

                  You still believe Darwin’s tripe?
                  It’s all been debunked.
                  The cathedral are only just clinging to it.
                  What debunked it? DNA mostly.
                  Do your own reading.

                  On the issue of DNA manipulation generally, it’s the endgame, and when man start to play God and design life, God will act. So, the end days are not far away, as is obvious if one reads the news…

        • jim says:

          Yes, more likely than a genuinely self driving car. But far from inevitable. Right now our ability to predict the IQ of a fetus from its genes is not good enough to be interesting.

          • Cloudswrest says:

            I think true self driving cars are still a long way off, but I do think we will have an explosion of what I call “co-pilot” functionality. These include automatic emergency braking (for collision avoidance and stop signs/traffic lights), automatic safe distance following with and without cruise control, lane maintaining on the freeway, and other various “safety” features which could dramatically lower insurance rates.

        • Dave says:

          According to “Idiocracy”, a documentary on dysgenesis disguised as a comedy:

          “Perhaps genetic engineering could have solved the problem, but scientists of the day were more interested in stimulating hair growth and prolonging erections.”

          • Walter Alter says:

            And you think prolonging erections is not a priority?! Keep in mind that genetic engineering is not horse breeding and that obsolete notions of social Darwinism from the landed aristocracy are going to run up against far more rapid advances in cognitive enhancement than breeding for qualities of survival when survival issues are no longer the point due to technology and the minds that invented it. As too using humans, we no longer breed for survival, we breed for longevity and pleasure, which, Viagra aside, can include the pleasure of discovery and beauty.

            • peppermint says:

              Longevity and pleasure? Die of a heart attack while fucking a nigger, Boomer. You are a disgrace to civilization and the Aryan race.

              • Walter Alter says:

                Yah, right, Sparky, let’s do troll insults at dawn. Disgrace? If civilization bit you on the ass, you’d call it “Billy” and start to moan. Aryan? You mean like Sarmatian, Scythian, Saca, Cimmerian, Androphagi, Agathyrsi, Agrippaeans, Amyrgians, Budini, Dahae, Geloni, Gargarii, Haraiva, Legae, Mathura, Parni, Suren and a couple dozen other mulatto tribes stretching from the Arctic Circle to Persia; those “Aryans”? Yah, longevity and pleasure you monk.

              • Steel T Post says:

                Die of a heart attack while fucking…reminds me of…

                “Women gonna be the death of me. What a way to go!” -Ray Kennedy

                🙂 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2mnS3cCCPg

      • Walter Alter says:

        Genius production is a serious issue, but any decrease in genius level, however that might be measured, will be compensated for by artificial intelligence which is making some long sought breakthroughs and at a rate that is catching a lot of people by surprise. Not fantasies. I’m not sure that the net gain is negative if you have a far larger number of almost geniuses topped with a small decrease in the number of absolute geniuses, assuming your conclusion is correct in the face of the rapid expansion of technology in China, India and elsewhere, principally in Asia. AI is no joke and will cut through ideologically generated blindness like a hot knife through a corrupt news industry. You gots your facts and you gots your interpretation of those facts…inductive vs. deductive where deductive is dictatorship of the obsolete.

        • Steel T Post says:

          Maybe.

          I’m watching AI with a close eye. Historian Yuval Harari in his best seller Sapiens predicts humans will become extinct because a new species, either cyborgs or full AI beings, will make us humans as obsolete, just as Cro-Magnon did to Neanderthal.

          Humans have passed their expiry date
          ynharari.com/future/articles/humans-have-passed-their-expiry-date/

          His Google talk on Techno-Religions and Silicon Prophets is good too.

          • jim says:

            People have been predicting AI a long time.

            The way a self driving car works is that a human drives the car around a few times, and then human annotate what the senses of the car perceive, and on subsequent drives the car uses the map generated by humans. This is not AI. AI would be if the car could drive on a road that it had never driven on before. True AI would be if the car could recognize what it sees, rather than relying on the map to interpret what it sees.

          • Walter Alter says:

            Yep, AI may render us extinct, or, at least obsolete. Hell, not much of a contest to put pure logic up against neurotic, phobic, narcissistic, sadistic, amnesiac, hysteric, emotional barnyard creatures such as ourselves. 10,000 years and we’re still slamming shovels against each others’ heads. I figure AI will just watch us self destruct and take over in about 25 years.

            • Steel T Post says:

              The Medea hypothesis (Ward, 2009) postulates that multi-cellular lifeforms are ultimately suicidal. Could A.I. escape the same fate of its creator? Maybe it/we already have, existing only as a computer Simulation. (Bostrom, 2003)

              Just as I am, poor, wretched, blind;
              Sight, riches, healing of the mind!

        • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

          India is in decline. Modi just confiscated a huge % of everyone’s savings. Currently it’s going back to being far left of the west.

          China is in decline. Currently you can only exchange yuan for USD in sufficient quantities on the black market at a rate much lower than the official exchange rate. Arguably still better than the west but not enough to have great technological progress.

          • thinkingabout it says:

            While I’m not expecting India to be the source of any great technological progress, I think Modi’s demonetization is a good move.

            Too much of India’s business was in the informal sector/black market. It was far too easy to buy things, even expensive stuff in the biggest markets in the biggest cities, without paying tax. Plenty of shops would offer you a 20% discount if you paid cash, so they could hide it from the authorities and stuff it inside the walls of their houses.

            Now there are stories of bundles of old rupee notes being thrown in drains, because black marketers don’t want to come under the government’s radar by trying to exchange such large sums for new notes.

            While there is a huge anti-tax sentiment in the US, I think developing countries’ governments need all the tax money they can get, if they’re going to have to build roads, toilets, schools and tanks.

            • jim says:

              In all the world, there is one man who has the incentive to maximize long term tax revenues, because taxes go directly into his personal pocket, the power to maximize long term tax revenues, because he is as close to being an absolute monarch as you are likely to find in the middle east, and the undeniable competence to maximize long term tax revenues.

              And that man is King Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum.

              Guess what tax rate he decided was optimal.

              Most governments tax at substantially above the short term Laffer maximum, all governments, with the likely exception of King Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, tax at far above the long term Laffer maximum.

              Further, your argument presupposes that governments do something useful with revenue. The only useful things that governments do with revenue is defend the country against enemies internal and external. In practice, most government expenditure consists of rewarding and subsidizing bad behavior by the underclass.

              • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

                Jim is absolute monarchy always this good at decision making? I’m a bit skeptical. Monarchs tend to have their power drift to advisors in which case you go back to informal power structures and bad incentives, although not as bad as democracy.

                Didn’t Louis XIV tax at near-leftist levels (over a third). 18th century England taxed at low teens from what I can remember but it was an aristocracy, not a monarchy. It was actually America that had the lowest tax rates back when the constitution was actually followed.

              • pdimov says:

                “Most governments tax at substantially above the short term Laffer maximum…”

                Most governments, with few exceptions, tax at whatever they can get away with. The richer and more law-abiding the populace, the higher the taxes. It doesn’t matter whether they “need” the revenue or not.

              • thinkingabout it says:

                Defence expenditure is a major part of India’s government spending. We’re among the top importers of military hardware, and those are priced in dollars. So India’s pretensions to being a major economy by “PPP” won’t hold any value there. The government also needs cash to keep the Pakis out of Kashmir, the Chinese out of the Northeast, and the Blue empire-supported Maoists out of the center.

                They also need the cash to buy off the votes of poor Indians – it’s a necessary evil, in my opinion. Modi is a hindu nationalist with pro-capitalist tendencies – if he doesn’t offer loan waivers, free rice and other such bribes to the vast throngs of India’s poor, someone else will. And they will win the next elections.

                Re Rashid al Maktoum, I feel like he gets away with more than a democratic leader can, because he has absolute power, free military cover from Saudi and the US, and economic security from Abu Dhabi’s oil money. Plus there aren’t really that many poor among Dubai’s native population.

                Modi’s party is stuffed with hindu nationalist fanatics raised by a paramilitary volunteer organization, so I’m somewhat more confident in their ability to use the money wisely than a run-of-the-mill democratic Indian government.

                • thinkingabout it says:

                  And let’s not forget, every poor Indian the government refuses to feed and house is a prime target for Christian missionary activity. There’s a good reason Indian Christianity is strongest where the people are the poorest – fisherfolk, forest and mountain tribes and so on.

                  Long term, this tendency towards profligacy and welfare may wreck the economy. Socialism always does. But short term I can’t think of any other answers.

    • viking says:

      I think you have the wrong enlightenment this dark one is opposed to being inside the matrix thus the red pill meme. I understand you THINk its different this time but its not. Maybe turn off the boob tube and pick up Marcus Aurelius.

      • Walter Alter says:

        I haven’t had broadcast TV for 20 years, opting for freedom of choice for data input via the Internet. Don’t take the Matrix movie metaphor as reality. Escaping the trap of the “other directed personality” doesn’t require a pill, it requires curiosity and an emphasis on interpretive updatability in the war against obsolete memes.

        • viking says:

          If you think spending all day on the internet is somehow more real than watching sitcoms well you ought to raise some kids and watch what it does to them but you would need a reference point of more than 20 years.

          • Cavalier says:

            No kidding. This Walter Alter fellow probably thinks he isn’t a cluster of vibrating organic molecules set in motion by the collapse of a star 14 billion years ago.

            • peppermint says:

              He probably thinks he’s starstuff, and a reasonable probability of being a soul created by ((Yahweh)), in either case for the purpose of maximizing the total quantity of pleasure in the universe.

              • Walter Alter says:

                Not that “star molecules vibrating star collapse billion star” canard again. The cliche monster destroying Tokyo again. Obviously there is some sort of “Brotherhood of the Star Collapse” happening here. Sounds like DOCTRINE, smells like DOCTRINE. See what I’m saying about obsolete cultural memes? Must be comfy knowing that update and upgrade will bounce off your skjold like partridges in rut.

    • shutupslave says:

      “Instead, there are persistent and distinct ideological groups in society, cutting across social classes and forming a series, with the largest groups being most typically guided in their thoughts and actions by a preference for family, authority, familiarity and tradition. Politically, these preferences find predominant expression in the ideas of the large number of so-called ‘non-politicals’ in society, and in Conservatism and then Liberalism (the strength of these preferences gradually weakening through the series).

      As the series progresses further, the next, progressively smaller, ideological groups seek to repress these identifications and preferences in favor of dynamism, social change, logical thought and the pursuit of theory as a guide to decision-making, these being expressed politically in Labourism, more overtly still in Communism and then, in an ultimate and extreme form, in Anarchism (or ‘Anarchosocialism’, the purist variety of it allegedly expounded by the Socialist Party of Great Britain). The more an ideology represses the preferences for family, tradition, etc. in favour of social change, dynamism and the pursuit of theory as a guide to action, the fewer in number its adherents are likely to be, with anarchists (or ‘anarcho-socialists’) being the smallest of all. Those seeking radical social change, so the theory contends, will always be hampered and restrained by the enduring preferences of the largest ideological groups.”

      Feels more like a barbell than a progressively smaller series to me.

  10. bro says:

    how do you redirect your wikipedia links to infogalactic?

  11. peppermint says:

    It is now obvious to everyone but the most deluded of christcucks that Whites are under attack. Christcucks would prefer us all dying out to violating their twisted moral code, thus I that death upon them.

  12. peppermint says:

    I think the biggest constitutional reform we need is to eliminate the Supreme Court. The President can take circuit cases and rule on them and then Congress can overrule him. In this way the judiciary is stripped of legislative authority which is remanded to the explicitly political branches.

  13. Alan J. Perrick says:

    Of course, a society requires not only women give way for men, but that beta males give way to alpha-and-omega men. I think that demarcating the boundary as being male society and female society is unneccesarily rough, after all consider how there will always be some “aliens” who don’t get it, but really and truly do want to live in a society that is well-governed.

    A.J.P.

  14. Alan J. Perrick says:

    Holiness competition is good, decadence is bad. Don

  15. vxxc2014 says:

    Look I have what will be bad news.

    We’re gonna make it. Whites, Europeans, Christians, America, Europe.

    We’re awake and have started struggling, all that was necessary was human nature feeling the pinch of extinction.

    It won’t be pretty and it should and will be ugly. Extra Cacas Nulla Salus.
    That’s eternal.

  16. Steel T Post says:

    Human nature is a great thing, isn’t it? Unfortunately, the (((New Testament))) doesn’t think so, e.g.:

    1 Corinthians 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit
    Colossians 3:5 Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature
    Galatians 5:17 For the cravings of the lower nature are opposed to those of the Spirit
    Galatians 6:8 lower nature
    Ephesians 4:22 your original evil nature
    James 3:15 That is not the wisdom which comes down from above: it belongs to earth, to the unspiritual nature
    1 John 2:16 For the things in the world–the cravings of the earthly nature, the cravings of the eyes, the show and pride of life–they all come, not from the Father, but from the world.
    Jude 1:10 mere nature

    That (((salvation))) you’re offering? Not interested. It has zilch to do with our natural life on this natural earth, and offers no salvation to our natural problems here and now in this world.

    • Robert says:

      A great many millions of people have disagreed, probably including your own ancestors. Not everything that a man naturally desires is healthy. Have you ever seen the verse below.

      Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.
      Ecclesiastes 7:29

      • Steel T Post says:

        Sure, the laws of nature are “a big pile of highly unpopular bad news” to “a great many millions” of magical thinkers. But reality isn’t determined by popularity contest, in case you hadn’t heard.

        • Robert says:

          Christians acknowledge and understand the “big pile of highly unpopular bad news” better than the atheists. We understand that humans are weak, that our nature, and nature itself, is prone to any number of “unpopular” things. It is silly that I even have to explain this to you, as it seems you have familiarity of the Bible, you should know that Christians know all about “unpopular bad news”. We love the truth, we love reality more than most. Christians have played an enormous role in the discoveries of the natural world and what you refer to as reality.

          What you fail to see is that your belief system (and you do have a belief system) doesn’t know what to do about it? What do we do when we are faced with these “unpopular” things, how do we act in the face of them? With all of the biological determinism (which is real), we still have free will, I can still choose to comment on Jims blog, I can still chose who to sleep with. It is the height of ignorance and bitterness to say that Christianity “has zilch to do with our natural life on this natural earth, and offers no salvation to our natural problems here and now in this world.”

          You do not comprehend, to steal from Lewis, that seeing through everything, is the same as seeing nothing at all.

          • peppermint says:

            » Christians acknowledge and understand the “big pile of highly unpopular bad news” better than the atheists.

            As demonstrated by their response to inequality of racial groups in the world, which is to invite them all over for tea and sympathy.

            » We love the truth, we love reality more than most.

            As evidenced by the Christian reaction to Darwin.

            » What you fail to see is that your belief system (and you do have a belief system) doesn’t know what to do about it?

            Did bearing the Cross cause you to write than incomprehensibly?

            » What do we do when we are faced with these “unpopular” things, how do we act in the face of them?

            Christians act by lying and blustering about pie in the sky when you die and love and charity.

            » With all of the biological determinism (which is real), we still have free will, I can still choose to comment on Jims blog, I can still chose who to sleep with. It is the height of ignorance and bitterness to say that Christianity “has zilch to do with our natural life on this natural earth, and offers no salvation to our natural problems here and now in this world.”

            what the fuck are you talking about? Yes, please exercise your free will to die of a heart attack while fucking a nigger sow. Since fucking a nigger sow is an act of charity it will grant you entry into Heaven.

            » You do not comprehend, to steal from Lewis, that seeing through everything, is the same as seeing nothing at all.

            Also CS Lewis: I know God exists because muh feels.

            I know evolution exists because muh feels. That need to feel part of something bigger, its natural object in the nation. Christcucks attach it to the ((Jews)) or ((Humanity)) or anything other than the nation because they are cuckold traitors and should be helicoptered.

            • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

              ” Yes, please exercise your free will to die of a heart attack while fucking a nigger sow. ”

              LOOOOL. If there was a peppermint standup comedy show I would definitely pay to watch it.

          • Steel T Post says:

            Christians love the truth? Pray tell when Jesus was born.

            “It is beyond reasonable dispute that Luke dates the birth of Jesus to 6 A.D. It is equally indisputable that Matthew dates the birth of Jesus to 6 B.C. (or some year before 4 B.C.). This becomes an irreconcilable contradiction after an examination of all the relevant facts…”

            The Date of the Nativity in Luke (6th ed., 2011)
            Richard Carrier
            infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/quirinius.html

            My belief system? Yeah, it’s the same as in the Declaration of Independence, pantheism/deism. “Nature’s God.” GNON. Problem?

            “The idea of a God we infer from our experimental dependence on something superior to ourselves in wisdom, power and goodness, which we call God; our senses discover to us the works of GOD which we call NATURE, and which is a manifest demonstration of his invisible essence.” -Ethan Allen (The Only Oracle Of Man: A Compendious System Of Natural Religion, 1784)

            As for the “atheist” canard that you love to toss about like CNN tosses around sexual innuendo about Trump, I’d say you’re the atheist, or at least the most effective recruiter of atheists ever seen, according to this fellow:

            “Indeed I think that every Christian sect gives a great handle to Atheism by their general dogma that, without a revelation, there would not be sufficient proof of the being of a god.” -Thomas Jefferson (to John Adams, 1823)

            • Steel T Post says:

              Robert: “It is the height of ignorance and bitterness to say that Christianity ‘has zilch to do with our natural life on this natural earth…'”

              Haven’t read Jesus yet? Or was the Jesus character the one demonstrating “ignorance and bitterness” when he said the following:

              • John 12:25 anyone who HATES THEIR LIFE in this world will keep it for eternal life
              • Luke 14:26 If anyone comes to me and does not HATE father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters–yes, EVEN THEIR OWN LIFE–such a person cannot be my disciple.

              Jesus said basically that christianity has nothing to do with this life, because you’re supposed to hate this life. Those who love this life don’t have the impetus for individualized status-whoring for a good spot in a foreign capital city in the middle east fantastically floating in the clouds over a (((Jewish))) homeland, traitor.

              • Robert says:

                Peppermint:
                If you are serious about your helicopter line, then there is really nothing more to discuss. Christians would decimate all the limp wristed atheists in a real life conflict, we have a very rich martial history, you have fags.

                Steel T Post:
                The truth is Christ was born. It is common knowledge among Christians that Dec 25 was probably not his real birthday, I think you are missing the point. You do realize that the declaration states “all men are created equal” which is obviously false.

                Maybe you never put two and two together, so I will help you. Jesus is saying that there are things that are more important than your life here on earth. Example: Muslim says to you, “convert to Islam or I’ll kill you”. If you choose death, you agree with Jesus. Example: Your Mom says, “hey, why don’t you try being gay”. If your response is, “hell no” you agree with Jesus.

                • jim says:

                  The Christians who worshiped the God of Charles the Hammer would decimate all the atheists in real life conflict. Today’s Christians, not so much.

                • Steel T Post says:

                  The truth is, you’re too much of a coward to say when Jesus was born, because the accounts in the Bible are mutually exclusive, that is, contradictory. Both accounts cannot have happened. You get that sort of mixed-up stories when dealing with criminals or a parasite (((scammer))) breed of people.

                  (((Jacob))) means “he deceives.” Who does the Jewgod love? (Romans 9:13) “The Deceiver.” Maybe you never put two and two together, but you’ve been scammed by a fake news (((Rabboni))) character selling you a fantastical afterlife mess of pottage in exchange for your birthright here on this very real world.

                  Oh, and if you want to play the faggot card on Peppermint, please do Google Images for “Jesus+John+Beloved” and “Zeus+Ganymede” and tell me if you can tell the difference in the pederastic art. And every priest who ever corn-holed an altar boy knows that, even if they try to keep such knowledge inside the semen-ary.

                • peppermint says:

                  » Christians would decimate all the limp wristed atheists in a real life conflict, we have a very rich martial history, you have fags.

                  The Crusaders, with logistics across a continent before the age of sail, defeated better armed opponents on their own turf.

                  Then they cucked out and “converted” those opponents, but never could raise an army out of their “converts”, so the Crusader States were swept away.

                  If they had understood that their struggle was not the struggle for cuckstainty but the struggle for Western civilization and the White race, they would have sent for their wives and children and colonized the Middle East as the Romans did before them.

                  Instead they wasted large amounts of White blood for nothing.

                  Whites infected with cuckstainty are as capable at war as other Whites, but are uniquely capable of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

  17. Robert says:

    The replies have run out.

    Jim:
    Many of the soldiers at the tip of the spear in all of our militaries are Christian. There are some seriously sissy Christians out there for sure, but don’t overstate it. I go to a run of the mill evangelical church and we just had a concealed carry class for the men of our church.

    Steel T Post:
    I have no problem saying that I do not know the exact date Jesus was born, really isn’t that big of an issue to me.

    You do realize that those painting aren’t actually of Jesus right?

    I am not going to convince you and you are not going to convince me. Every man must choose a team in this world, every team has its articles of faith that cannot be proven, but must be believed (atheists, just like everybody else, say “no no no, but I really know the truth”). I will say to you, what I say to all atheists, are you sure thats the team you want to be on, are you really sure?

    • Steel T Post says:

      You have no problem ignoring completely contradictory accounts of the birth of the Jesus character. One of the accounts in the Bible has to be fictional; they simply cannot both be true. You embrace fiction and obfuscation over fact.

      Concealed carry in church? Sure, church can be decent to the extent that church ignores Jesus, who preached: “blessed are the meek…resist not evil…turn the other cheek.” Defending oneself is exactly the opposing what what Jesus taught. But then loving your life enough to defend it is also exactly the opposite of what Jesus taught. In most conservative churches, Jesus’ teachings are completely ignored via some very creative and totally laughable “interpretation,” and all he’s good for is a free ticket into a fantasy afterlife.

      I do appreciate that you don’t follow Jesus’ pacifist horseshit any more than I do. I conceal carry too.

      Got to chose a team? And you’ve chosen Team (((Jew))). What’s that make you? “Inside every Christian is a Jew.” -The Pope Me, I’ve chosen Team Family. Which Jesus openly taught to hate.

      Of course, you ignore Jesus’ teaching to hate your family and hating your life. I too ignore Jesus’ horseshit about hating family and my life.

      I’m not an atheist, as I’ve explained. But I expect that you must double down on the lies, eh, like any other SJW. Sad. But you’re following the typical Christian habit of lying for the faith, one that even Paul admitted to: “For if the truth of God hath more abounded by my lie unto his glory, why yet am I also adjudged a sinner?” (((Romans 3:7))) But I bet you don’t feel any worse about your lying than (((Paul))). That happens when you hold (((Jacob the Deceiver))) in high esteem. Work on that, white man.

Leave a Reply