Accusations alone prove Nothing

Every ant is a part of the whole universe and every ant creates its own universe “in its image”. I heard Alan say those two things. Well, he used the word creature and not ant. Hmm… I wonder if the entity of progressives can create a universe in its image. What does that even mean?

But in the context of this “very important” game we’re playing wherein certain assumptions were made, such as people and ants existing, what considerations do we give progressives as an entity? It’s an interesting puzzle.

Coincidentally, I was just now rummaging through my Watts collection to see if I could find where he said “nothing can be more egotistical than true repentance.”

If we apply that to progressives, what is considered the fruit?

That seems so… absolute. The fact that I found that interesting is interesting because it seems I’m looking at the bible in a new light.

Molyneux had a good point about that: He said that due to the monarchical-type governments (or even tribal leaders on smaller scales) people were selected for obedience since anyone who protested the ruler was executed or banished; therefore bootlicking is in our dna (except for random rebels).

On top of that, the public school system is not for education but obedience and allegiance training. Even our sports is preparation of soldiers for war. I think it was the whole first year of WWI that the UK didn’t need the draft due to overwhelming numbers of volunteers, so investigators wondered what could explain such self-sacrifice to country. I watched a whole movie on it, but damn I can’t find it again.

Here’s a 2-min dramatization of the differences between “civilized justice” and “frontier justice”:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYLLoG8zd74[/youtube]

Good movie btw.

Wendy

Racism is not murder, and, certain, lies are, akin, to rape, in that they do as much damage.
The punishment for the crime, is often as bad or worse than the crime itself.

I stopped watching that whole fiasco a long time ago, I didn’t want to feed it anymore energy.

I mean don’t get me wrong, I’m sure Hollywood is rife with rape and all manner of sordid behavior, including women voluntarily using their V to attain an advantage over their competitors: men, and women who don’t use their V, and then playing the Victim card later,like they were coerced into it

We can have our suspicions about who did what, and we can act on those suspicions, distancing ourselves from people, but a suspicion is not the same as knowledge, not even close, so we have to be extra careful when doing so.
And it’s wrong to always, only suspect the accused of wrongdoing, and never, not the accuser.
Progressives, the MSM, Hollywood and the entertainment industry our completely biased against the accused, falsely equating accusation with conviction.

exactly

If you’re a knowing accomplice to a murder, even tho you didn’t pull the trigger yourself, if you obtained the gun, egged the killer on, helped them plan it and so on, you’re just as guilty as the person who pulled the trigger.
If 25 people take part in a murder, we don’t give each one of them a year in prison, we give each one of them 25 years in prison, or approaching 25 years, perhaps some 10 years, others 15.

The liar is the accomplice, and society pulls the trigger.
It’s hard to punish thousands of people who shun the person falsely accused of rape, because there’s so many of them, and one shunning by itself isn’t so bad, difficult to ascertain, and there’s no legal precedent for punishing someone for shunning you, but there is legal precedent for punishing slanderers.
The liar plays the integral role here, they’re the one who started it.
Without them, none of it would’ve happened, but without any one of the individuals who go on to hate and shun the victim, the accused, the other individuals would still hate and shun them, and so the liars action is equal to or greater than the thousands of small, subsequent actions, hatreds and ostracizing.

Not in thirty years. I’d forgotten just how funny it was. Time to re-watch.

Back when Britain had something of a soul.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2gJamguN04[/youtube]

Hegel is arguing that the reality is merely an a priori adjunct of non-naturalistic ethics. Kant, via the categorical imperative, is holding that ontologically it exists only in the imagination, and Marx is claiming it was offside.

Not true, as a national socialistic fascist where others would call totalitarian I have a firm respect for law. I would have so much respect for law in a national socialist society that anybody that poses a threat to the state or its laws I would support their immediate removal. :-"

That’s a conviction and respect to law that others just can’t understand or fathom.

That’s what really bothers me about the bullshit left-right political spectrum in North America.

You’re either right or left, conservative and liberal.

Well no, there are some things I am very conservative on while there are other things I am left leaning on mostly on economy. It never occurs to retards or the lowest common denominator that there are those in the middle of the spectrum like myself. I have both conservative and left leaning views on society.

Then there is the whole if you don’t support Donald Trump you must be a leftist, democrat, or Hillary Clinton supporter bullshit. No, I fucking hate both of them! I hate the fucking democratic and republican party equally! For fuck’s sake!

“You don’t like capitalism? You must be a communist.” I don’t fucking like either system you bitch ass cunts! National Socialism is the third position much like Mussolini’s corporatist fascist model was. That’s what world war II was all about because the third positionists couldn’t be controlled by the central banking of London or New York City who incidentally funded the 1917 Russian communist revolution from their capitalist compounds.

Don’t forget the systemic hypocrisy of liberals that talk about the equality of human beings but have no problems supporting endless chain migration into a nation that essentially drops people’s wages down where if you criticize it you’re a racist. The same kind of liberals that pays Jose eight bucks to mow their yard, pays Rosita minimum wages to do their laundry, and pays Manuel less than minimum wage to wash dishes in their high end luxury restaurant that they own on the liberal side of town.

When a liberal says white privilege or oppression, what they really are saying is white Jewish privilege and oppression (They own a majority of the wealth) but because they can’t say that as it would be anti-semitic (whatever the fuck that means) where their political organizations are controlled by influential Jews anyways they conveniently target European white people as the last group of people where it is socially permissible to still hate.

I think what Wendy is saying is that lying isn’t a physical attack or altercation as rape is thereby being less severe by comparison, with that being said however lying about rape can cause extreme physical risks or attacks on the person accused.

In an African village for instance lying about a man committing rape could get the accused stoned to death by the villagers before getting a chance to prove his innocence of the act first.

There is suppose to be due process of law in the west even with rape but radical feminists seem to want to get rid of that where a person can be jailed for accusation alone.

Carleas statement of racism being equal to murder is ridiculous and ignores ethnocentrism that is prevalent in all cultures the world over.

Found it! Gonna post it here so I don’t lose it.

FWD to 1:09:00

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQU6ApHn-AM[/youtube]

It also contains the bit about the element of irreducible rascality, the left and right hand of god, the Yetzer Hara, hide and seek.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHtLNWkPsZ0[/youtube]

In barbaric countries, men falsely accuse women of crimes to see them put to death as well. It’s cheaper and less humiliating than divorce to falsely accuse your wife of adultery and have her erased from existence, but who would then marry such a man afterwards? King Henry VIII had no trouble finding dumdums, one after the next.

Overall, women are averagely more intelligent than men, so how does that even happen to women? Gullibility?

The computer beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kickboxing! You may be smarter, but I am stronger, so go make me a sandwich before you get stoned

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnoxKXkPqEE[/youtube]

Let’s play chess sometime.

I suck at that game because I’m too adept at missing the obvious A long time ago I was figuring how much phone cord I’d need to run along and up n down walls in my apartment so I could have the phone closer to the computer when my friend said “You dumbass, get a cordless phone from walmart for $20 and put it wherever you want!” That’s when I realized there was no hope for me

You ever watch the Great Carlini?

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5R3HOuBB8Vg[/youtube]

I remember my liberal high school English teacher Mr. Fowler showed us a raw, unedited clip of Muslim women being stoned to death.
That was the first time I saw it and it was quite shocking.

Now I’m far from an expert on Islamic law, but if it’s anything like biblical law, and I imagine it is, it should be nearly as easy for a wife to have her husband executed for committing adultery.
But if it isn’t, than yes, that is an injustice.

There are injustices committed by society specifically targeting women, and there are injustices committed by society specifically targeting men, and both need to be corrected.
We cannot expect feminists/progressives to be the ideology/party for both women’s, and men’s rights.
If you do your research you will find, they’re only interested in promoting women’s rights, often at the expense of men’s.
They believe men aren’t and have never been disadvantaged in any way, shape or form by society.
either we need a men’s rights movement comparable to feminism, or we need to dispense with feminism altogether, and have a gender/sex rights movement looking out for the interests of both genders/sexes.

For a long time men were ahead of women on iQ tests, and now it appears women have caught up.
How much of that is because the tests have been redesigned to achieve sexual parity is debatable.
From my research tests have been partly redesigned with this objective in mind.
Intelligence tests are partly subjective, partly objective, they were designed by white people, more specifically white Frenchmen originally, and white people tend to value certain kinds of intelligences over others, and they probably tend to be ones they’re also good at.

If women tend to be more ahead of men now, it’s probably only by a point or two.
The more interesting difference is not the overall difference of a couple of points, but that women’s language skills tend to be significantly better than men’s, and men’s visual spatial skills significantly better than women’s.

All that being said, this fact remains: almost everything invented, has been invented by men, recently mostly white men, and historically mostly caucasian men, and that’s just as an important indicator of intelligence as iQ tests.
Perhaps women will catch up one day in that department too, as they’re becoming more educated, but at this point it remains to be seen.
The coming advances in science, society and technology will almost certainly by and large be invented by men, mainly white men at that, and to a lesser extent Asian men.

As bad as that is I’ve seen videos online of men tied to giant rubber tires and set on fire burned alive for allegedly raping women. It’s out there and certainly does exist.

Fuck all barbarian scum. I don’t care what imaginary friends they have.