Generation, Tradition, and the rise of the Far Right

The case when an organism has no immune response and one in a million or billion of cells assimilates the virus DNA without dying. And once it has assimilated that DNA then that makes it automatically better than before because reasons.

Immune-system’s ignorance is strength.
Have to wonder why so many creatures have an immune system - what a mistake.

If you are a frail woman, physically and mentally then you can’t put up with much raping. But if you are ‘strong’ then no harm done. Sure some things change.

Or put it in other words, if you are strong then you can handle the raping, don’t be a sissy. In fact, you can take pride in the raping, feel good about it because it means you are strong if you don’t mind it.
A woman in a coma is also super strong. When you are numb and don’t give a shit you are practically Superwoman.

Or as they say, if there is not much present to destroy to begin with then not much can be destroyed.
Woohoo!

I hear some people like to drink profusely to make those ‘stronger’ people bearable for them, I mean, to gain the same ‘strength’ as they have and not be sensitive anymore.
Become a numpty with a bumper of beer in hand.

That comes with making tolerance into a virtue. Think about it… (not you Miss P.)

Having taste, having standards,… all those things just hold you back from becoming the Supercow.

There are some people who, when you tell them about the influence of commercials, will answer that they themselves are not affected by it.
In my experience I find that it’s precisely those kinds of people who are most affected by commercials.

Let’s imagine Bobby to be a very tolerant person.
He can tolerate a lot of shit, it doesn’t upset his stomach nor mind.
Now Bobby is exposed to a lot of propaganda, of whatever sorts. At first he offers some mental resistance to the ideas. Maybe he senses that they violate his being, his sense of identity. But the resistance which Bobby can offer is limited and what’s more, he is a very tolerant person and so he can tolerate all sorts of psychological abuse without breaking a sweat.
Eventually Bobby simply accepts the ideas as true because he is tolerant and his resistance was broken down. The alternative would have been for Bobby to try and remove himself from the environment with the propaganda.

Now Bobby doesn’t mind the propaganda anymore, he has internalised it as being good.
What he does now oppose vehemently is anybody who reminds him of what has happened or who points out how ridiculous it is for him to adopt those ideas. It would be very painful and also, he still has to function within the environment where those ideas are circulating and that’s very difficult without developing ulcers or worse.

Yes, I know Miss P., you are not affected by negative propaganda because for some reason that negative propaganda is not informing you on who you are and what your culture is. You can tolerate it all with ease and you only believe and think what you want to think.

Me, I’m vulnerable and I think getting control over mass propaganda and competing with the opposition is essential for a future of Europeans. Don’t worry Miss P., people will not be affected by it if they are ‘strong’.

I guess we are making progress.
At least you are not attacking the idea of having pride in something which one hasn’t personally achieved himself as an individual.
As I have said before, don’t be a ‘reactive hater’ and don’t attack my values and ideas. Don’t criticise my approach to life. You need to learn to listen and not talk so much Miss P… If your values and culture are superior then you won’t mind anybody else spreading their ideas and values while you keep to yourself and your children. Remember tolerance is your strength. So no counter-signalling from you.

Identifying the other or something as other from oneself, in opposition to oneself, doesn’t sound narcissistic to me.
It’s been a while that I have read about narcissism but from what I remember the narcissist sees others as extensions of himself.
And he gets angry if those supposed extensions of himself don’t do what they are supposed to do, in his eyes.

I don’t expect Jews to be friendly towards me. I think they do their own thing and have their own plans.
From my observations, and this took some time to learn and accept, some people don’t see themselves as just some other individual within an ocean of individuals. They see themselves as a group in competition with other groups. And I think there is nothing wrong with that.

Yeah, narcissism is fundamentally egocentrism, which is the inability to differentiate between what is subjective and what is objective. This is Wikipedia-approved definition. As far as egocentrism goes.

Some of them think that they are the cause of everything . . . thus no reason to blame anyone other than themselves. Everything comes from within, they say.

And then, some think that they are never the cause of anything . . . thus no reason to ever blame themselves. Everything comes from without, they say.

They can’t observe causal relations as they are. Instead, they have to substitute them with imaginary ones.

This discussion is going in circles. #-o

Because a healthy person should be a hypochondriac like you, right?

Everything should to be interpreted as RAPE. You know, to trigger the immune response. (I don’t even know how you get through your day, eyes)

And when you keep obsessing about them, how bad they are, you’re not affected?

Alternatively, when Bobby spends most part of his life reacting and talking about propaganda, he will be drawn into a re-framed dialogue that should not have happened in the first place. But Bobby no longer sees it, he only sees the dialogue in terms of what he was shown and reacted to. Nothing else is talked about. Things that should matter. Turn on the tv and see what is talked about and what is NOT talked about - look at the nature of the dialogue itself that is presented. Your reactivity (your immune system, as you say) makes you vulnerable to being sucked into a garbage dialogue. Who determines what is talked about, because that’s the direction you will be going. Do you want to talk about European accomplishments and how the world has benefited from it (and still does), or the evils of slavery and colonialism?

At the very least we have an idea where the other is coming from. I can see that your reactive methods make you very easy to manipulate and use, because you always take the bait. Well, anyway, enough of that.
I think the biggest factor that is yet to be mentioned and that will have a big effect on either method is technological progress and globalization. This is what I am worried about more. If everyone is going to get even more plugged in, some type of segregation would have to be put in place (maybe even as far as going off the grid completely), because things are going to start changing very fast and in new and unpredictable ways. The battlefield of competing values will become more complex because there will be a lot more players interacting and influencing each other. This is where things might really get messy.

You said I am frail and not strong.
It looks like you are worried about my health much more than I am.

I don’t think of myself as being unhealthy, that’s what you apparently think.
Yet you say I am a hypochondriac.
I think my immune system is fine, it’s you who thinks there is something wrong with it.

What you proposed as an analogy is much more invasive and destructive than rape.
You don’t give a shit about it, you don’t grasp that intellectually. But you do react to the emotions that you associate with the image of rape.

Nobody cares about the Jews being ‘bad’. That’s something which you can’t process.
If the lion eats the villagers and we try to prevent further deaths through lions then yes, we are affected by lions and yes, while we talk about it and recognise this we are affected by it too while we try to figure out what to do.
Sorry, we are not Supermen who aren’t affected by our competitors because we are beyond their reach.

Ehh, what do I care about anti-White propaganda. It’s not like it’s affecting my life if I focus on my own culture. Btw. we need less White people in leadership positions.

You -
“What??? You care about this thing? What, you are afraid? What you are not superman? Well, that must mean you are affected by it.”

Expected answer -
“No, no, I don’t care, I’m strong, I’m not affected by it. Tell me what to do and how to think so that I’m strong.”

Do tell what to do, to be ‘strong’. Ah, you say ignore it and focus on your self.
The thinking goes like this -

People who are so strong that they are not affected by something don’t care about it.
So, if I don’t care about it and ignore it then that must mean that I’m now strong.
Ignorance is strength.
q.e.d.

Hello fellow White people.
We really should repent for our sins of colonialism.
As a strong White person, I’m in favour of less White people, I love diversity.

Man, don’t concentrate so much on the Jews, concentrate on your own culture.
Listen to what that (((White person))) is saying about White privilege.

Really, I don’t understand what good it does for you to concentrate on the Jews.
This obsession is not good. You should focus on your own culture.

By the way, fellow White people, White culture does not exist.
I mean what is White culture?
Can a Black man not play Mozart? Don’t be racist!
There are no White people, there are only ethnicities.
switching to Europe
What’s a German? Mohammed is a German, he has a German passport. You aren’t racist, are you?

See what kind of dialogue is running through your own mind? I swear, you’re just like a cocklebur. (this should be my new nickname for you)

Eyes wide open, and what exactly were you doing before your eyes were open, huh? That should give you a clue as to where your weaknesses lie (maybe it’s somewhere in the inability to learn from history and predict consequences), and with your gung ho attitude, you are probably going to step into every single booby trap that will be set before you. See, everybody is ready to re-act when shit hits the fan, but apparently nobody has brains to see it coming and be able to prevent it; and so…the history repeats itself, again and again. Baa!.. I mean, is humanity still stuck in the evolutionary stage where it prefers to respond to carrot and stick approach?

When you get organized, I will be closely watching exactly who your leader is, his biography, his friends, who or what supports the organization, and what will it actually get achieved/changed because there is a lot of hollow theatrics going on in the world. This will tell me a lot more than listening to emotionally charged slogans and mottos. Even the best intentioned organization, for the lack of self awareness and intelligence, will get infiltrated and used, which brings me back to your eyes, which though wide open, may still not be seeing everything that’s going on.

Watch out for controlled opposition:

Just came across this interview online, in which Ahmadinejad may be running for presidency again. Now, I’ve been watching him for a while now and one thing you’ll notice if you watch his other interviews (especially with American media) is that he’s always aware of possible leading questions and never gets sucked into the interviewer’s discussion or wording (about the Jews or holocaust, or anything else that can be twisted and used against him later). This guy is not stupid, he’s very careful about how he answers questions, and you can tell that he knows how propaganda works.
euronews.com/2017/04/19/syri … 1492701153

Smart guy, the pinnacle of intelligence, he knows what the target audience believes to be self-evident truth and stays within said boundaries to not scare away the customers.

If you would not approve of it you would call the same actions ‘reactive’ or whatever you think sounds negative.

Pandy, I don’t care about your beliefs and what you hold as self-evident truths.
I’m not here to pander to you or sell you anything, to manipulate you step by step.
Not everybody wants to be a prim cow.

And as for changing the morality of a people, you can only degrade it further with the ways of the merchant, the peddler.

Your approval would be a dead giveaway to be on the path of degradation.
But hey, you keep watching and disapproving.

If you are not sure about something, what to make of it, watch the degenerates and what they make of it. They have very good instincts when it comes to degradation.

Hilarious.
And that from the same person who says you should not concern yourself with what others think and do.
I’ll just watch your reactions as a great gut indicator of what to make of things.
It’s not like you can help it and control it for more than a minute.

What Pandora is telling you essentially can be boiled down to: “you should ignore the enemy that is destroying you, value yourself instead”.

This is obviously retarded. If I didn’t value myself then I wouldn’t care to defeat an enemy that is trying to destroy me. Furthermore, if I hated myself then I would assist the enemy in destroying me.

The very fact one has the will to defend themselves is proof of self-love and self-valuing.

That Pandora gets something so obvious wrong can only mean one of the two things:

  1. Either she is an incredibly stupid airhead with no comprehension of anything beyond her feelings (like the Arcturus Descending character here), aka she lacks the CAPACITY to understand why she is wrong, or
  2. She has ulterior motives in her trying to talk certain people into ignoring their enemy and dropping their guard. This does not necessarily mean she is a Jew, but the possibility is not excluded just because she says she isn’t. In other words, she lacks the DESIRE to be right in the first place, or at the very least the desire to speak truth to others.

Based on her previous postings: while she is not always correct about things when she is wrong it is more often due to bias, which is lack of desire for perceiving the truth, rather than lack of capacity.

Thus the latter, that she has some ulterior motives, is more probable.

Panda is simply saying that you are emotionally reactive and that you need to stabilize your emotions before proceeding to interact with the external world.

No, that’s what you’re saying.

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.

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.

—^^^
The serpent (suspicion) biting at the heels of Ahdam (for still wanting to be God, the controller of all life).

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.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DcA1TtaP_c[/youtube]

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.

Real traditionalism:

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: