Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

Moderator: Uccisore

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby AutSider » Sat Apr 22, 2017 7:27 am

No, that's what you're saying.
User avatar
AutSider
BANNED
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 9:04 pm

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Is_Yde_opN » Sat Apr 22, 2017 8:02 am

Somebody is talking about Jewish power and what is the association? - Gas-chambers.
Solution? - Not to talk about Jewish power.

Talk about reacting emotionally.


What I find telling is that I never see her bringing up the same ad hominem attacks (and yes, that doesn't require swear words for it to be ad hominem attacks) when it comes to something like feminism or whatever she is in favour of.
You are a feminist? - You should concentrate on yourself and not talk about the patriarchy. See how this re-frames the dialogue in bla bla bla...
Don't be so reactive, honey. Care about your own family.

Women should care more about their own families, in particular care for having one but that doesn't make those cheap shots into a (good) argument


Muh reactive.
...

What's annoying is having to waste my time on a reply to these cheap shots and attacks.
User avatar
Is_Yde_opN
Thinker
 
Posts: 786
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 9:43 am

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Mithus » Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:55 pm

Two things I noticed on this board:

Whenever somebody mentions the "J"-word, somebody else shows up, all suspicious, and smells a rat. It seems to be a kind of conditioning, like Pavlovs dog, because it doesn't matter whether you say something positive or negative. You only have to say the word, and immediately you become a potential anti-semite, Nazi, or whatever.

The other thing is the way (some) women and (some) man interact here. I often noticed that the original subject becomes less important than the act of hitting there where it hurts most. For a man it probably hurts most to be called weak and whiny, when he is merely stating or protesting against grievances. For a woman it's maybe being called stupid and irrational. Some women are doing that quite often ( Joker was another "victim"). Some men are doing that as well, but it's less effective, because then another conditioning shows: somebody else calls them immediately womenhaters or misogynists, which are killer-arguments as well.

Would be interesting to know who does the conditioning.
..... panta rhei .............................................
User avatar
Mithus
 
Posts: 184
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:05 pm

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby James S Saint » Sat Apr 22, 2017 1:23 pm

---^^^
The serpent (suspicion) biting at the heels of Ahdam (for still wanting to be God, the controller of all life).
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25768
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sat Apr 22, 2017 4:48 pm

AutSider wrote:No, that's what you're saying.


Excuse me, sir, but every third or fourth word she's using is either "reactionary" or "reactive".

I kinda feel sorry for emotions for being so reactive. Maybe we should just strip them way. That way we won't worry or care about anything.
I got a philosophy degree, I'm not upset that I can't find work as a philosopher. It was my decision, and I knew that it wasn't a money making degree, so I get money elsewhere.
-- Mr. Reasonable
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3565
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Is_Yde_opN » Fri May 19, 2017 1:45 pm



Former White Democrats are migrating and joining either ranks among the cuckservatives or come directly to a more radical branch.
Can you even be on the left, be pretty and not do porn, nowadays? Difficult to imagine. Maybe if you have AIDS or something.
Same goes for men, better be obnoxious, physically and particularly personality wise. Otherwise you are going to have a hard time among the resentful swamp dwellers.
User avatar
Is_Yde_opN
Thinker
 
Posts: 786
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 9:43 am

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby AutSider » Sun May 21, 2017 4:37 pm

Real traditionalism:

http://www.dailystormer.com/just-what-a ... der-roles/

“I’m in a traditional marriage”
“I’m all for traditional gender roles”
“I want gender norms to be like the old days”

These are refrains I’ve heard endlessly repeated as the discussion over WHITE SHARIA has advanced. They are coming from women and a few weak men counter-signaling the WHITE SHARIA meme.

Because of the critical importance of this discussion for the survival of the white race and its European civilizations, I wanted to take a minute to explain to all the men and women claiming to be so-called traditionalists all the concepts and social boundaries that defined traditional relationships. This is the most important education that I can possibly give the community at this moment, and I ask that you ask yourself if you are really embracing traditionalism like you claim to be.

Coverture
Coverture was the reality for all of European history up until the mid and late 19th century, when feminist agitators, the media, and academic establishment triumphed with their agitations through its abolition. The basic principle of coverture is that the rights of the woman are completely subsumed into that of her husband’s. A married woman could not own property, sign legal documents or enter into a contract, obtain an education against her husband’s wishes, or keep a salary for herself.

William Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England, Volume I:

The very being or legal existence of the woman is suspended during the marriage, or at least is incorporated and consolidated into that of the husband: under whose wing, protection, and cover, she performs every thing; and is therefore called in our law-French a feme-covert; is said to be covert-baron, or under the protection and influence of her husband, her baron, or lord; and her condition during her marriage is called her coverture.

UCLA gender studies professor Ellen Carol DuBois (whose career is chronicled in the Jewish Women’s Archive, of course) highlighted in her histories of women’s rights “the initial target of women’s rights protest was the legal doctrine of ‘coverture’“, and that 19th century feminist icon Lucy Stone despised the common law of marriage “because it ‘gives the “custody” of the wife’s person to her husband, so that he has a right to her even against herself.‘”

If a woman decided to leave her marriage she was a penniless non-entity no matter what her previous position was in life (truly, there is no better position for an errant whore to be rendered into). Any restoration of traditional gender roles starts by restoring coverture, thus removing financial incentives for worthless scheming whores to destroy the sanctity of marriage by abandoning it over whims and lusts. Marriage, up until the abolition of coverture, meant that the woman was permanent property of one man, allowed continued existence and any degree of freedom only in accordance with his desires.

Bride Price
The dower grew out of the Germanic practice of bride price (Old English weotuma), which was given over to a bride’s family well in advance for arranging the marriage.

Before a woman was her husband’s property, she was her father’s. This is why the father gives away the bride at the marriage ceremony. Traditional marriage was a transfer of property, with the priest serving the role as the trusted third party to do the background research and make sure the transaction was honest. It was essentially like getting the sale of your apartment validated by a notary. The daughter was sold off by her father, and it was the father’s sole judgement of who was eligible to lawfully purchase his property.



The status of women as property was nearly universal in European cultures, with the exception of Jewry and some groups of gypsies, where access to tithes and trust followed a matrilineal line. This was why the Jews were so keen to attack these ideas, because the patrilineal passing of property was innately offensive to their culture. Europe only has this absurd notion of women as independent entities because of organized subversion by agents of Judaism.

Domestic Discipline and “Marital Rape”


Coverture and bride price were abolished to ridiculously assert women were independent entities with “rights” so that they could lobby for suffrage. The implementation of suffrage culminated in legal penalties for domestic discipline and the concept of marital rape so that women could abandon their most basic household duties, thus destroying their homes and their husbands’s lives. The thing about these changes is that they are really fresh and new. While the 19th century might seem like a long time ago for many of our young readers (it isn’t, on the civilizational timescale it is just last month and on the evolutionary timescale it is mere seconds) these new changes began in the lifetimes of our parents and finished in many of ours, and civilization was immediately and measurably the worse for wear.

Wikipedia:

The reluctance to criminalize and prosecute marital rape has been attributed to traditional views of marriage, interpretations of religious doctrines, ideas about male and female sexuality, and to cultural expectations of subordination of a wife to her husband—views which continue to be common in many parts of the world. These views of marriage and sexuality started to be challenged in most Western countries from the 1960s and 70s especially by second-wave feminism, leading to an acknowledgment of the woman’s right to self-determination (i.e., control) of all matters relating to her body, and the withdrawal of the exemption or defense of marital rape. … The criminalization of marital rape in the United States started in the mid-1970s and by 1993 marital rape was a crime in all 50 states, under at least one section of the sexual offense codes.

Rape is a property crime and nothing more. First a crime against the property of the father, and then a crime against the property of the husband. This change only finished in the US and UK in the nineties, when I was 8 years old. Women existing in a state of slavery to the sexual whims of their husbands is not some barbarism of prehistory. This was universal common sense for whites up until a couple decades ago.

feminist slap

The woman clearly loves this, and you can see the righteous satisfaction and levity on the man’s face.

Likewise, hitting a woman out of her head was seen as benevolent and a universal necessity in every marriage until the sixties, and even portrayed positively in movies and film. Regular slapping and the occasional vicious beating of a woman was a necessity in every household. Women need to be regularly disciplined to keep their heads about them. They can be intellectually mature and clever to the point of deviousness, but they will always have the emotional state of a very young child and we all know what happens when you spare those the rod.

On this subject I hear two narratives from low-T men in the alt-right. The first is that all these transformations in the rights and status of women happened in reaction to family abandonment and general hardships upon women. Even those I respect like My Posting Career’s PLEASUREMAN fall for this sniveling lie from the mouths of manipulative whores. To these I have said: let us examine the data.


Sorry, the data says you’re a fucking liar.

Broken families happened as a result of these changes in the status of women, not as the cause of them. The reality is that extramarital sex and birth was at an all time historical low because of Victorian standards of morality. The only spikes on that chart before 1950 were a result of world wars, because a man that died in some kike’s war could not marry his whore. Men held up their end of everything. They married women, they provided for them, they gave them newfound comforts and innovations like laundry machines that reduced their domestic workload to nil. They gave them full legal independence, and then they even stopped giving them the basic boundaries of discipline. What did women do with all these new rights and comforts? Well, you see how that graph goes. They whored like never before through the sixties and seventies, and Western civilization has been rotting ever since.

They did this because white men had a fool’s compassion in their hearts and lost the good sense to shove their faces into a countertop and give them a swift kick to the gut as hard as they can when these skanks had it coming to them.

Men Counter-Signaling WHITE SHARIA
So most of this “I’m totally traditionalist but WHITE SHARIA is terrible” nonsense is coming from women, but sometimes it is coming from small-souled bugmen as well. Some of these men are being bullied by their wives. Some of them just have no will to power. Beardson just used this line, and as far as I’m concerned he’s not only no longer the leader of the thot patrol, but no longer eligible to even be on it. We’ll be bullying whores without him from now on.

Here’s the reality of European tradition: women were a category of property that had a single instance of sale. They were complete slaves to the will of fathers then husbands, both having free reign to beat them and the latter having the lawful right to fuck them, where and when they pleased. This was the reality for thousands of years of European history and the change in this status only finished in our and our parent’s lifetimes. There’s nothing Islamic about this. It is just the default position of any civilization that is not being destroyed by decadence. Man up, put women under your heel, throw away their birth control and make them bear you children and take care of your house. If they resist, discipline them.



If you are uncomfortable with the WHITE SHARIA meme because it contains the word sharia, I can understand that, but “muh feels” is not an argument against the efficacy of the meme. This meme is effective because it has an immediate effect of being shocking and lurid to the senses of women and weak men and forces people to talk about the status of women in our civilization. All we are pushing for is a return to the status of women we had in the early 19th century before Jews and their feminism ruined our civilization. This should not be controversial. If you are opposing WHITE SHARIA because you disagree with women being reduced to the status of property to be beaten and fucked at the whims of her husband, you are a faggot and a cuckold and have no place in any right-wing site, and instead belong at the bottom of festering bogs like Reddit and Voat.

A final word to offended “traditional” female readers:
Despite all your assertions of being a good traditionalist, you fight against the implementation of traditional gender roles wherever they begin to be discussed. You’re not a traditional woman and you don’t want a traditional relationship. You just like the sound of the word traditional and the outfits you see women wearing in Victorian era photographs. You speak traditionalism with your Pinterest and Instagram posts, but your actions scream of your lascivious natures. You agitate only for the “rights” of modernity: to deny your fertility, to destroy families, to rot at and injure the lives of good men who have acted with honor and decency in all their dealings to you.

You’re a whore.

That would normally be a forgivable thing. I’ve found the company of many prostitutes quite amicable, and whatever gods may be know it is impossible to meet a woman that isn’t one in this era. However, that you would sully the good name of European tradition, that you would would run around using it as a cloak for your harlotry makes you the an entirely contemptible whore. Your blasphemy against the history of Europe is to a level unforgivable through words alone, and you need to have your face bashed in by the fists of good men before a great horned shrine. On the far precipice of life, as a palsied chill ascends fast to put cold grasp upon those streams that pulse beside your throat you may beg the apologies of your ancestors.

‘What am I that should so be saved from death?
‘What am I that another death come not
‘To choke my utterance sacrilegious here?’

Be honest about what you are. Don’t sit here and pretend you’re a nice traditional girl when you fight against any implementation of traditional values. Say aloud what you are, on the streets, to your families, on social media: “I’m a despicable whore.” Do it before it is too late, because I swear to whatever gods may be that when the purge comes if you have been using traditionalism as a cloak for your revolting degeneracy your name is going on a list and we will be coming to make you pay for it. You will feel the punch to your throat first, but the hours afterwards at the hands of a WHITE SHARIA gang will make that seem as just a brief and gentle touch against your skin. Your ribs will be broken. Your face will be broken. Some of you will not live to tell about it. This I promise: a much needed correction is coming for you soon, you disgusting skanks.

[center]-----[/center]

Random comment from somewhere:

Typical ordinary man a century ago:

"My wife tried to sound intelligent and talk politics late night, I wasn't sure whether to laugh or bend her over my knee and spank her... So I did both.

Hardcore anti-feminist Nazi today:

"Come on guys listen to how good this woman's arguments are, let's all listen to what she has to say and pay her patreon. This chick says all the things I want to say!"

Are you starting to understand just how far the overton window has shifted regarding women?
User avatar
AutSider
BANNED
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 9:04 pm

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby MagsJ » Mon May 22, 2017 4:32 am

I'm surprised that there weren't more cases of men being battered to death by their wives.. preferably whilst he slept.
Image
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist
 
Posts: 16961
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby AutSider » Mon May 22, 2017 10:00 am

MagsJ wrote:I'm surprised that there weren't more cases of men being battered to death by their wives.. preferably whilst he slept.


Probably for the same reasons there weren't many cases of men actually abusing their wives and beating them to death instead of just spanking or slapping them the same way children are physically disciplined.
Reasons:
1. Legal consequences - society would likely disapprove of both actions and have some punitive measures against them as they are dysfunctional.
2. Social consequences - from neighbors and friends to relatives to the couple's own kids, beating up your partner or murdering them is generally frowned upon as the murdered man/woman is somebody's son/daughter, brother/sister, father/mother, nephew/niece etc.
What child would like one of their parents murdering the other?

Ok, but let's say that women conspire to kill all the men in their country whilst they are asleep, and magically they succeed in this conspiracy and kill 50% of the population.

And let's say they have enough sperm saved up so reproduction itself isn't a problem. What now? Most of the people who do the actual physical work and organizing and who know how the infrastructure of a society works, are dead.

Also, most of the people who are capable of protecting the society are dead. I predict the society would either turn into a 3rd world-like shithole or it would get conquered by another nearby country which noticed the utterly retarded tactical mistake these women made, and decided to exploit it by conquering it for territory and resources.
User avatar
AutSider
BANNED
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 9:04 pm

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby MagsJ » Mon May 22, 2017 7:52 pm

AutSider wrote:
MagsJ wrote:I'm surprised that there weren't more cases of men being battered to death by their wives.. preferably whilst he slept.
Probably for the same reasons there weren't many cases of men actually abusing their wives and beating them to death instead of just spanking or slapping them the same way children are physically disciplined.
Reasons:
1. Legal consequences - society would likely disapprove of both actions and have some punitive measures against them as they are dysfunctional.
2. Social consequences - from neighbors and friends to relatives to the couple's own kids, beating up your partner or murdering them is generally frowned upon as the murdered man/woman is somebody's son/daughter, brother/sister, father/mother, nephew/niece etc.
What child would like one of their parents murdering the other?
I thought that partnercide/crimes of passion was the biggest cause of deaths worldwide. :-?

Why would a wife need spanking or slapping akin to her child?

Ok, but let's say that women conspire to kill all the men in their country whilst they are asleep, and magically they succeed in this conspiracy and kill 50% of the population.

And let's say they have enough sperm saved up so reproduction itself isn't a problem. What now? Most of the people who do the actual physical work and organizing and who know how the infrastructure of a society works, are dead.

Also, most of the people who are capable of protecting the society are dead. I predict the society would either turn into a 3rd world-like shithole or it would get conquered by another nearby country which noticed the utterly retarded tactical mistake these women made, and decided to exploit it by conquering it for territory and resources.
This begs the question... who is steering humanity?
Image
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist
 
Posts: 16961
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Is_Yde_opN » Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:06 pm



Soothing voice as always and the reporter isn't shrill either.
Can recommend for those who need some calming tea-time.
User avatar
Is_Yde_opN
Thinker
 
Posts: 786
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 9:43 am

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Is_Yde_opN » Wed Jun 07, 2017 1:12 pm



Sounds pretty centrist to me.
User avatar
Is_Yde_opN
Thinker
 
Posts: 786
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 9:43 am

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby fuse » Fri Jun 16, 2017 10:40 am

Uccisore, where've you been dude?

OP was not a bad mapping of the terrain, you hit on some good points.

Uccisore wrote:Once a society is estranged from history, tradition, and the useful impact of language, they are intellectual newborns with nothing to fall back on.

Definitely, and with nothing else to stand on to make their way in the world, a significant number of young left-leaning people have ended up latching onto whatever ideology was most readily available.

The largest problems unique to the left today are the perpetuation of identity politics and the cession of all other values to the pursuit of equity. What is needed here is needed everywhere: leaders who can put people in touch with necessary knowledge and values, and who can demonstrate a better way forward.
User avatar
fuse
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4515
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:13 pm

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby AutSider » Sat Jun 17, 2017 1:01 am

There are no problems in the left, the left itself is a problem. It is a memetic disease promoting weakness at best and outright self-destruction at worst.
User avatar
AutSider
BANNED
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 9:04 pm

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Is_Yde_opN » Sat Jun 17, 2017 12:40 pm

After bringing liberalism to the Middle-East, the neocohenservatives will bring liberalism now to the Middle-Eastern and African replacement immigrants living in Western countries.

And why not?
If you actually believe in the blank slate theory then there is no reason not to and no reason why it shouldn't work.
User avatar
Is_Yde_opN
Thinker
 
Posts: 786
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 9:43 am

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Is_Yde_opN » Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:56 am

We have to double down on this progress thingy.
I have to admit, I'm a bit nervous about the future.
Can we please all double down on the classical liberalism, on all those things we did in the last decades to make things better more quickly?

#didn't have enough proper liberalism
#need proper liberal messiah

Where is the heroin-e when you need some?
User avatar
Is_Yde_opN
Thinker
 
Posts: 786
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 9:43 am

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Jakob » Tue Jun 20, 2017 5:14 pm

Far Right is nothing. It has no values.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5715
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Tue Jun 20, 2017 7:06 pm

AutSider wrote:Real traditionalism:

http://www.dailystormer.com/just-what-a ... der-roles/

“I’m in a traditional marriage”
“I’m all for traditional gender roles”
“I want gender norms to be like the old days”

These are refrains I’ve heard endlessly repeated as the discussion over WHITE SHARIA has advanced. They are coming from women and a few weak men counter-signaling the WHITE SHARIA meme.

Because of the critical importance of this discussion for the survival of the white race and its European civilizations, I wanted to take a minute to explain to all the men and women claiming to be so-called traditionalists all the concepts and social boundaries that defined traditional relationships. This is the most important education that I can possibly give the community at this moment, and I ask that you ask yourself if you are really embracing traditionalism like you claim to be.

Coverture
Coverture was the reality for all of European history up until the mid and late 19th century, when feminist agitators, the media, and academic establishment triumphed with their agitations through its abolition. The basic principle of coverture is that the rights of the woman are completely subsumed into that of her husband’s. A married woman could not own property, sign legal documents or enter into a contract, obtain an education against her husband’s wishes, or keep a salary for herself.

William Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England, Volume I:

The very being or legal existence of the woman is suspended during the marriage, or at least is incorporated and consolidated into that of the husband: under whose wing, protection, and cover, she performs every thing; and is therefore called in our law-French a feme-covert; is said to be covert-baron, or under the protection and influence of her husband, her baron, or lord; and her condition during her marriage is called her coverture.

UCLA gender studies professor Ellen Carol DuBois (whose career is chronicled in the Jewish Women’s Archive, of course) highlighted in her histories of women’s rights “the initial target of women’s rights protest was the legal doctrine of ‘coverture’“, and that 19th century feminist icon Lucy Stone despised the common law of marriage “because it ‘gives the “custody” of the wife’s person to her husband, so that he has a right to her even against herself.‘”

The foundation of Couverture is lost today. Men and women are not equal, and traditional societies understand and accept this fact of nature. Women have an enormous "sexual power" which means advantage. Men do not. Thus in order for men and women to be "equal", men must be given over lots of advantages and enticements in marriage. Otherwise marriage has very little to offer an average man. Why ought a man remain loyal to one woman, his wife, when his nature proclivity is promiscuity and chasing many women around? Male promiscuity is bad for society because it leads to internal friction, competition, and infighting. A society isn't much of a "society" when the males are killing each-other for females.

And so, female power is restricted, legally through Couverture, and male power is enhanced, by allowing married males legal superiority and Rights (the original conception of rights, as meant in "classical liberalism"). Thus, traditionally, marriage enhanced the social and legal power of an average male, to coincide and "equalize" with the sexual power of an average woman. Obviously, a woman can "trade" her sexual worth, for security, at any point in her life. And that is the reality of average women anyway, who quickly learn in puberty, the seductive power of their beauty and sex, to average men.

Modern people don't really conceive the extent to which "Classical" societies were, and still are run, around the world. Of course, marriage is relative to societies, cultures, and tribes. As is tradition.


AutSider wrote:If a woman decided to leave her marriage she was a penniless non-entity no matter what her previous position was in life (truly, there is no better position for an errant whore to be rendered into). Any restoration of traditional gender roles starts by restoring coverture, thus removing financial incentives for worthless scheming whores to destroy the sanctity of marriage by abandoning it over whims and lusts. Marriage, up until the abolition of coverture, meant that the woman was permanent property of one man, allowed continued existence and any degree of freedom only in accordance with his desires.

Classically, a woman has immense sexual power, regardless of being married. Traditionally, marriage restrains and restricts a woman's promiscuity as it does to the man too. The wife becomes the property, and responsibility, of the husband. She loses all her "rights". However, a woman's "rights" in life, classically, are different than men's. What ought a woman have "rights" to in life, compared to men, when a woman can already "buy" an entire lifetime with the mere allure of her sexual offering? Sex is enough, and this is not something talked about very well in modern times.


AutSider wrote:Bride Price
The dower grew out of the Germanic practice of bride price (Old English weotuma), which was given over to a bride’s family well in advance for arranging the marriage.

Before a woman was her husband’s property, she was her father’s. This is why the father gives away the bride at the marriage ceremony. Traditional marriage was a transfer of property, with the priest serving the role as the trusted third party to do the background research and make sure the transaction was honest. It was essentially like getting the sale of your apartment validated by a notary. The daughter was sold off by her father, and it was the father’s sole judgement of who was eligible to lawfully purchase his property.

Dowry has an extensive history, and a huge distinction between "modern" and classical eras. Do you know the reason and cause behind dowry? If a young woman lost her virginity before marriage, before the father relinquished it to another man, then she was of less value. Because a woman's value revolves around her sexual chastity. Today this is known as the crime of rape. If a woman loses virginity, before or outside the allowance of her father, because she is the responsibility and property of her father, then she is marred, scarred, defaced, like writing graffiti on somebody's else's wall. Traditionally, the concept of rape was entirely dependent on a woman's father.

Dowry is the payment to a husband's family, on behalf the wife's family, if the wife is impure or unchaste.

Traditionally and classically, in the older and archaic church and spiritual institutions, a woman could not even marry in "Conservative" churches unless she was/is Unchaste and Virgin. Thus, it was a very serious matter that a female "lost" her virginity (was taken) before her marriage. Essentially, a female who is promiscuous outside marriage and traditional society, was excluded an shunned from traditional (classical) society.

In truly conservative societies, this is still the norm today, although "foreign" to the modern world.


AutSider wrote:The status of women as property was nearly universal in European cultures,

..........

..........


Most of your subsequent points are accurate, factual, and historical. I don't have much to add, except, I personally reject this "White Sharia Islam" nonsense. Replacing one Abrahamic sect (Christianity) with another version (Islam), is not a proper answer. Europeans, White, should dig deep into the Past, Nature, Instinct, Genes, and really "get back to basics", if heading toward the traditional, classical, conservative direction.

It is ironic and laughable that today's, modern "cuckservatives" claim to have traditional marriages, when they marry unchaste women, sluts, promiscuous women, feminists, etc.

You can't build from such severely cracked and sandy foundations, or if you do, then know your building, your "new world" culture, is destined to topple over within a century or two.

If you want to build something that lasts a millennium, or two, as the Catholic Order originally did and completed, admirably in my opinion, then the Rules must be followed ascetically and diligently. Marry white virgins, and from those, produce something higher.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Tue Jun 20, 2017 7:12 pm

Jakob wrote:Far Right is nothing. It has no values.

Unfortunately most or all "value" comes from the Far Right.

The Right hand is the one that takes in resources. The Left hand is the one that spends it, or squanders it, in many cases.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Otto_West » Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:56 pm

One doesn't have to outline very much how this expirimental neoliberal global multiculturalism is unsustainable going into the future. In the west we have disaster multiculturalism operated by both disaster socialism and disaster capitalism.

It is guided by the belief in the irrelevancy of culture, tradition, and race by highest maximum ideal that plagues the west namely homo economicus where all individuals are valued in so much of economic output. This has become the prevailing central value of the west the last hundred years or so.
Your entire world of fantasy and make believe is doomed, have a nice day.
User avatar
Otto_West
Doom Pornographer
 
Posts: 898
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 7:40 pm
Location: Dumbfuckistan- Will Work For Depreciating (FRN) Shekels.

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:49 am

Otto_West wrote:One doesn't have to outline very much how this expirimental neoliberal global multiculturalism is unsustainable going into the future. In the west we have disaster multiculturalism operated by both disaster socialism and disaster capitalism.

It is guided by the belief in the irrelevancy of culture, tradition, and race by highest maximum ideal that plagues the west namely homo economicus where all individuals are valued in so much of economic output. This has become the prevailing central value of the west the last hundred years or so.

Post-colonial, new world societies, the united states, are slave societies. They still are, except modern propaganda has become so sophisticated, that average, modern people, don't realize or even have the slightest clue the extent of their slavery. For example, the average, modern, "westerner", believes that he or she is "free", but is just the opposite.

Those most enslaved, are the ones who tend to vocalize the loudest, how proud and "free" they are. Those who claim to be most "independent", are usually severely dependent, on others.

I'd say that any real "freedom" begins with properly and correctly identifying institutions and systems of power.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Is_Yde_opN » Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:14 pm

Urwrongx1000 wrote:
Jakob wrote:Far Right is nothing. It has no values.

Unfortunately most or all "value" comes from the Far Right.

The Right hand is the one that takes in resources. The Left hand is the one that spends it, or squanders it, in many cases.


It's just his way of saying...

Image



I generally prefer this from him than hearing the usual subversion lines.
'Nothing' grants space for having room for a more authentic identity.
Being more than a disembodied, rootless individual, an economic unit in the schemes of an elite which is estranged from the people they rule and have come to despise.
User avatar
Is_Yde_opN
Thinker
 
Posts: 786
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 9:43 am

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:29 pm

Lol
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Is_Yde_opN » Sun Jul 09, 2017 11:02 pm

Image
User avatar
Is_Yde_opN
Thinker
 
Posts: 786
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 9:43 am

Re: Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

Postby Otto_West » Mon Jul 10, 2017 3:25 am

^^^That is funny.
Your entire world of fantasy and make believe is doomed, have a nice day.
User avatar
Otto_West
Doom Pornographer
 
Posts: 898
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 7:40 pm
Location: Dumbfuckistan- Will Work For Depreciating (FRN) Shekels.

PreviousNext

Return to Society, Government, and Economics



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]