White countries need White Shariah

[Otto_West]

Honor killings are great, subordination of women is awesome, and damn right women should live in fear. Yes, you're a filthy feminist and when the day of the rope comes, that's how you shall be treated.

But at least you honestly admitted you are a feminist. This means you'll get a quick, merciful death.

"highly emotional response" that's inaccurate woman projection all over again.

"project a person of valour or masculinity" You think I seek some sort of appraisal from you people here?

My own reaction to this sort of subjunctive fulmination revolves less around whether his arguments are correct and more around how we might explain the reason that he opted for choosing them. Why these particular opinions and not others?

Clearly, there was a point in time when he first began to think about race and gender in what "intellectuals" construe to be a "political" or "philosophical" frame of mind. In other words, that point in time when all of the experiences he had had -- experiences that had predisposed him to one set of political prejudices rather than another -- were more or less set aside and he commenced to do some serious research on the subjects. That way after "studying the matter" he could convince himself that there was indeed an optimal frame of mind to be had here and that if you delved deep enough into these matters you could discover it.

Or maybe even invent it. Your very own explanation for why most folks do what they do historically, culturally. Instead of what they ought to do naturally.

What he discovered is that, as with folks like Satyr, only when you acknowledged that 1] human interactions revolved first and foremost around biological imperatives and that 2] it was possible to grasp the necessary assumptions to understand them were you then able to both prescribe or proscribe human behaviors -- all of them apparently -- as either in sync with or not in sync with nature itself.

The nature.

Which is why I would be curious to know how he did come to make that distinction between memes and genes here. What actual experiences did he have in his life that predisposed him to embrace his current rather dogmatic political agenda. And how does he know that all of the knowledge and information that he has acquired in order to transcend "I" as an "existential contraption" reflects an optimal mix of ideas and arguments?

Finally, can he really say with any degree of certainty that new experiences, new relationships, new sources of information and knowledge etc., won't upend his current assessment and take him in a whole other direction?

Or, instead, is my own frame of mind -- that folks embrace one of another religious or secular dogma in order to embody the "psychology of objectivism" -- a more reasonable manner in which to grasp his rutting fulminations here.

If you study anything of sociological significance concerning society race has everything to do with social cohesion construct or not.

[A Shieldmaiden]

Outsider wrote:

Honor killings are great, subordination of women is awesome, and damn right women should live in fear. Yes, you're a filthy feminist and when the day of the rope comes, that's how you shall be treated.

You are a raving nut bag.

You think I seek some sort of appraisal from you people here?

You love it, you suck on it.
Save it, sweetie, for someone who cares. It will not be me. I now know what your standards are, and now you know what mine are, and that’s all the difference—I hope—in the world.

[Is_Yde_opN]

In order to set up reverse colonization of the west acquiring all its power, wealth, military, and technology you have to weaken it not just ethnically or culturally but also in terms of fertility.

Working as planned of course unfortunately.

If you use Negroes and 3rd World populations to achieve your ends then you will call it something like "reverse colonisation" to guilt unaware or mentally broken or mentally ill Europeans. A smart enemy.

They already have a lot of power, they already have access to all that technology, it's about maintaining that power by destroying the competition. The enemy is not strong physically, he isn't even that much more intelligent in the upper elements of IQ distribution, what he is is cunning and ugly beyond belief. You don't expect this amount of ugliness and that's why it's difficult to understand the enemy for those who are so different from him.

[AutSider]

Honor killings are great, subordination of women is awesome, and damn right women should live in fear. Yes, you're a filthy feminist and when the day of the rope comes, that's how you shall be treated.

I don't even know why anybody would think I'm against these things. I've been speaking a lot lately about the need to punish dysfunctional behavior (which would be honor killings), the necessity of male dominance (female subordination), and of course women should live in fear, because fear is an emotion that evolved for a purpose, which is to protect us from danger. A healthy amount of fear is necessary. All societies are based on fear - fear from the threat of violence by daddy state's physical enforcers - police and military, and fear from other groups which might seek to harm and conquer us. I see no reason why women should be exempt from this. The weak should fear the strong, and since women are weaker than men, they should fear men. It is the natural order of things. Not to mention that without fear there is no respect.


Yes, I'm all about receiving praise from brain-dead imbeciles on ILP. This is why I advocate White Sharia and other stuff which pretty much everybody here disagrees with. Because I want praise.

Because if somebody wants praise, the best way to obtain it is to advocate controversial stuff that only a small number of people agree with. Genius-level ILP reasoning on full display. Do tell us more.

[iambiguous]

Yes, I'm all about receiving praise from brain-dead imbeciles on ILP. This is why I advocate White Sharia and other stuff which pretty much everybody here disagrees with. Because I want praise.

Again, it's not what you are "about" pertaining to anything deemed "controversial". It's the extent to which what you think you are about "in your head" reflects more a sound philosophical analysis or an existential contraption rooted in a uniquely individual trajectory of experiences that predisposed you to a particular set of political prejudices.

You'll either explore that here with us [relating to gender or race] or you won't.

Or is this all basically an exercise in irony: game playing and name calling.

Are you just the Devil's advocate here?

[AutSider]

Haha. If you talk shit you have to be willing to back it up. This means risking injury, possibly even death.

It is what masculinity is about.

[AutSider]

Yeah, like these sickly looking, puny commie faggots will stop us from implementing WHITE SHARIA.

[iambiguous]

Haha. If you talk shit you have to be willing to back it up. This means risking injury, possibly even death.

It is what masculinity is about.

Again, you insist that this is what masculinity is all about without exploring the extent to which you acquired this frame of mind as embodied in an "existential contraption"; or as a conclusion you reached only after examining gender roles rigorously from the perspective of a serious philosopher.

What were some of the experiences that you had with masculinity as a child? How were you indoctrinated by your family, your community etc., to construe a particular understanding of masculinity?

How were these interactions understood by you as embedded in a particular historical context [our own] and a particular culture context [your own].

Also, convince me that when you demand of others that they "back up" what they say, you are not insisting instead that eventually they must come over to your side and "back up" what Satyr says.

If only [here and now] sub-consciously.

Let's start there.

[WendyDarling]

[iambiguous]

Yeah, that's part of my reaction to him. Especially when he comes in here huffing and puffing, strutting about in his black boots.

But there is also the part that, in all seriousness, I'd like to explore with him. Lots and lots of folks walk around arrogantly embracing one or another political agenda having never given much thought to the extent to which their values are rooted as much in the manner in which I construe the meaning of dasein as in a well thought out philosophical analysis.

I suspect that his reaction to me revolves in turn around an increasing concern [germinating "in his head" somewhere] that my points may well be reasonable. Or, perhaps, even applicable to him.

What then of his precious "self"? What if, like mine, it really is largely just an existential contraption?

[AutSider]

White Sharia relationship advice: How to control your bitch and have a happy relationship



The most important part is to use male privilege. Never forget to use male privilege.

[AutSider]

No need to make a trade, sweets. If you so desire, us WHITE SHARIA men can be both.

[Otto_West]

Interesting the level of social propaganda in today's generation of self loathing women concerning the west. The ongoing collective absurdity of what has become the west is maddening. Nonetheless your prognosis of alterating the course of this collective absurdity is unrealistic which I stick by my assertion on that basis. Indeed it would only exasperate an already terrible situation much more. I do understand your anger and rage as I've mentioned already before however one has to wonder if there is any kind of alternative to rectify the ongoing problem that would be less destructive overall. Honestly I am at a loss with that as I simply don't know and I have pondered on that for many years now. Time of course is against such a position which makes it all the more damning. Is there any way to change the female consciousness or psyche without the use of violence and coercion? I maintain that the only way for people to be liberated from controlled society or this twisted perverse civilization is for it to collapse completely, of course who knows how long that will take and if anybody at all in the world would survive such a transition. It's a giant catch 22 clusterfuck. If civilization continues as is unaltered it will eventually destroy itself, the entire planet, and all of humanity as we know it however as liberating civilization collapsing would be for all people(for those surviving such a transition anyways) the outcome could possibly be the same where there is only a small margin of transitional success by comparison. Some like myself believe that small marginal percentage of success is well worth the risk, it depends on one's perspective I suppose.

I leave this post with this firm belief of mine, this society or civilization cannot be reformed, it is beyond any kind of social and political reform. Usually a majority of the time when those try to forcibly reform society or civilization at its peak of decline and destructive moment of history such a plight becomes all the even more damaging. None of this of course is any constellation to you I'm betting but I leave you with it anyways. Feel free to respond with your thoughts.

[Is_Yde_opN]

No need to make a trade, sweets. If you so desire, us WHITE SHARIA men can be both.

Yeah, I don't get it.
Europeans are racist and rapists.
Muslims are racist and rapists.
And who is she trading with, she a racists and rapists owner?

[WendyDarling]

Why does everyone on these websites use college students to make their points? College kids are the most protected, liberal dumdums there are, they are clueless of the real world so why does every Tom, Dick, and Harry use them to represent the population at large? More worldly adults use more worldly adults to drive your points home.

[URUZ]

Why does everyone on these websites use college students to make their points? College kids are the most protected, liberal dumdums there are, they are clueless of the real world so why does every Tom, Dick, and Harry use them to represent the population at large? More worldly adults use more worldly adults to drive your points home.

Well said.

[Otto_West]

No need to make a trade, sweets. If you so desire, us WHITE SHARIA men can be both.

Yeah, I don't get it.
Europeans are racist and rapists.
Muslims are racist and rapists.
And who is she trading with, she a racists and rapists owner?

You can't expect imbeciles or dumb animals to make any sense especially herd animals.

[URUZ]

Why do all SJWs look alike? I think it's mostly just a fashion statement.

[Pandora]

Why does everyone on these websites use college students to make their points? College kids are the most protected, liberal dumdums there are, they are clueless of the real world so why does every Tom, Dick, and Harry use them to represent the population at large? More worldly adults use more worldly adults to drive your points home.

Thank you!

[Is_Yde_opN]

Why does everyone on these websites use college students to make their points? College kids are the most protected, liberal dumdums there are, they are clueless of the real world so why does every Tom, Dick, and Harry use them to represent the population at large? More worldly adults use more worldly adults to drive your points home.

It's popular because if you focus on the 'worldly' people who inform those young women then you'll get the usual anti-semite and homophobe replies.
As for this thread, the female college student is the important demographic when it comes to making a case for White Sharia.
Who else would better represent what happens when you liberate women from the traditional family patriarchy.

[WendyDarling]

Who else would better represent what happens when you liberate women from the traditional family patriarchy.

Okay. How's about this...

Researchers at the National Center for Health Statistics estimate that 78% of college-educated women who married for the first time between 2006 and 2010 could expect their marriages to last at least 20 years. But among women who have a high school education or less, the share is only 40%.

The findings are yet further evidence of the marriage gap in the U.S. along educational lines. College-educated adults are more likely to be married than less-educated adults. Among those who were ages 25 and older in 2014, 65% of those with a bachelor’s degree or more were married, compared with 53% of adults with less education, according to a Pew Research Center analysis.http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... -marriage/

SORRY NO TRITE GRAPHICS

Or this...

A woman with a college education may be less likely to tie the knot than her less-educated counterparts, but once she's married this college grad is more likely to stay that way, according to two economists.

The finding, based on a review of research from 1950 to 2008, also reveals changes over time in who is getting married and having kids and why. Historically, women with more education have been the least likely to marry and have children, but this marriage gap has eroded as marriage and remarriage rates for women with a college degree relative to those with less education have risen.

In fact, college-educated women now marry later, have fewer children, are less likely to view marriage as "financial security," are happier in their marriages and are the least likely to divorce. https://www.livescience.com/8049-colleg ... rried.html

Many women want to have it all...an education, a career, a marriage, and children too. With scientific advances, women can cryopreserve their eggs and fertilized embryos for when the time is right which is called planned parenthood, the responsible way to have a family.

[WendyDarling]

I strongly advocate for all career-minded young women to spend $20,000 of their earned, career wages to freeze their eggs so there is no rush to reproduce without the best, committed male mate, finances to raise a child in the middle to upper class, the acquired parental patience and awareness that comes with age to raise a better child, the time available to devote to family life, etc. Young, inexperienced, overwhelmed parents make poorer parents...literally in every way. True, they can crank out kid after kid, but without the resources and wherewithal to raise said kids, their rag-tag families become horrific, YouTube videos.

[WendyDarling]

Educated causasian and asian folks aim to reproduce by choice rather than per chance or error. They have the right mentality but no those couples are not spitting out 5-10 kids each. Does the world need more of an overpopulation problem? No. Do we need more starving children? No. Do we need more kids who raise themselves? No.

White sharia is a dumb idea which promotes procreation for procreation's sake in order to catch up with the number of offspring rather than finding ways to slow the reproduction rates of other races.

This world doesn't need any more ill-gotten ill-kempt ill people in it.

There is no need for large families...kids don't need to work when they get out of their diapers to provide incomes for the rest of their enormous families. Enormous families make me physically ill for they undermine the beauty of family. Parents should raise their children, not other siblings.

[Urwrongx1000]

There is a disparity between white population sizes versus non-whites. However I disagree with many "conservative" premises. The white race is *NOT* in danger, despite nationalists fear-mongering and claiming it is. Why is the white race safe-guarded? Because non-whites perceive, correctly, that the white race is "privileged". Non-whites fight viciously and desperately for access to white women, because they want move up the genetic hierarchy.

This means that there will always be a very high demand for white people, and white women. Purebreeds can only reproduce themselves. Therefore even if, hypothetically, the white population dropped, then the value and demand would increase exponentially. And that's true, historically. White women are the most prized around the world, generally. Second place are east asians. Everybody knows this, but nobody really talks about it openly because it's "racist and sexist". But that's the underlying truth.

Let's consider, for a moment, if there were "no white people" on earth. What would happen? A new group would be designated as genetically superior. That means, a new section of humanity, and their females, would be dubbed and deemed superior for breeding with. That's what "privilege" is. It's marked by appearances. Beauty traits are spawned from what I describe. That any woman or group of humanity is "very beautiful", is for these reasons and causes.

As long as white females prefer their own kind, white males, then there is no threat. And reality agrees. White women, in the end, return to their own flock, despite all their mistakes in life. It is the return to high culture and nobility that white men re-produce. A spiritual superiority that cannot be denied. The true power of european cultures, and its many offsprings. Ancient depths into the old, deep, forgotten wellsprings.

Other races do not inspire as much, nor do they have 'universal' values. East asians are introverted and exclusive, unwelcoming to outsiders, as are Jews in Israel who first require religious conversion and inter-marriage. Roman imperialism is the source of cosmopolitan ideology, that Southern Europeans are 'tolerant' of all outsiders and humanity. These are the true, real, and original "humanitarians". Others are pretenders. Even North Europeans are disdainful to those they "tolerate", holding double-standards. Universal Humanist ideology is a reflection of world-conquering behavior, an enslavement of all humanity beholden to a superior nation, of conquerors, owning their defeated nations and peoples.

[AutSider]

There is no such thing as "not in danger", only varying degrees of danger.

The number of whites is declining, while the number of some other races is increasing. Even when outnumbered and in this degenerate state, whites are still superior... to an extent.

There is a point when sheer quantity can overwhelm quality.

In any case, a group with below replacement birthrates doesn't have a future (as long as the birthrates stay below replacement rates).