Source: Western Man
Just look at who they sleep with/ marry.
That should tell you everything you need. You can’t lie with your intimate feelings.
Source: Western Man
Just look at who they sleep with/ marry.
That should tell you everything you need. You can’t lie with your intimate feelings.
I should say guilt-tripping.
….The technical term is Traitors.*
Which fits better? Which is better English?
Hopeless at memes, aren’t they?
“Instead a phenomenon occurs that psychologists call “displaced revenge,” where avengers target a proxy—someone akin to the original transgressor. A new study finds that displaced revenge is sweeter when the target seems to belong to the same group as the wrongdoer.”
Wrath, a sin.
“Across all experiments, avengers reported higher feelings of justice-related satisfaction against more closely tied people.”
Traitors get it first. I guess it’s a form of stoppering, like a cork or a spanner in a cog. You prevent the spread of traitor-ism, whatever that may be.
Sorry to quote MIND, I know it’s MSM but also niche and I read it for work.
You might think this is an eerie kind of fanfiction…
it is not.
Just bear with me here. Listen a little. 2,000 words.
What if the EEC, later known as the European Union, were in fact part of a long line of Empires? A chain stretching back into Ancient times? Now, every kind of society has a maximum size, and various points of failure, like a building.
The function of each of these Empires is simple – labour. Slavery in its brutal form but productivity nonetheless.
The only means by which this can operate is control. A series of levers and social ‘memes’ that keep the whole machine ticking over, because humans must be entertained. It’s not bread and circuses, it’s hot dogs and reality TV. Consider every Empire, by size or density of its population, an experiment. A living experiment with humans much like Calhoun’s rats.
With the same dismal end.
You could relate this to the circling of the degenerate drain known as r-selection.
I’m afraid it’s a little broader than that, you’d need HBD, biohistory and various other theories including psychiatry for a complete picture.
For example, I covered the probable role of syphilis and especially neurosyphilis in the formative modern history of the West. Then there comes the obvious selection pressures of war, Black Death and various toxins, released deliberately in many cases.
The Romans probably fell in IQ due to the cumulative brain damage of lead in their piping.
The Victorians later had problems with cholera.
Basic sanitation is a key vector of disease transmission, ironically. This would relate to water fluoridation in the modern water supply, I’ve linked to its neurotoxic state, acknowledged in science.
Population control can also be achieved by sterilizing STDs, the most recent being Ebola in that is sterilizes via death. Before that, the mysterious origins of HIV and the unusual number of strains, including those tested by militaries. Naturally, this would only work if you pushed some kind of Sexual Revolution to increase the transmission potential but kept it low for your own group.
I’m getting off topic. Let’s keep to certain facts.
Each Empire was doomed to fall, based on its sheer volume of inhabitants.
This is a rule of history.
The EU has already failed based on metrics alone. Its currency has failed.
With the Euro gone, there is nothing to prop it up.
Even the human labour doesn’t exist in both the numbers and the quality (IQ) required. The fall of the EU isn’t an achievement so much as inevitability. The dysgenics put in place for the world wars guaranteed any such plan was doomed.
Much like taxation of the wealthiest (most productive within a year), you can only push so far because people break. They’ve long been suffering the slow death of inflation. This changes a person, it alters the amygdala at least. People seem less polite, more crass and less content with whatever comforts or luxuries their money buys them.
Social power never existed, it’s a polite post-war lie to cover armament for military might.
Considering all of these facts, how can I explain recent events?
Russia is not the danger. The USA is a defanged hound.
A war with MENA is good for the money-lenders, based entirely on the resources found there and nowhere else. How dare those pesky locals demand to be paid for what’s in their country?
Hence, open borders aka NO borders.
It’s Communism with other nation’s resources.
A war with China, however… they don’t believe China has the balls.
Oh, it does. It’s been preparing since WW2 for the next match.
It produces most goods in the world. How quickly would it win, owning all the equipment? They understood Marx well, you cannot produce tanks without a Means of Production.
This isn’t by any stretch all. To keep this short.
There are many economic unions in the world. Only the EU gets attention.
They are temporary alliances, that shall evaporate upon trial.
Nobody wants to upset China, because they’ve been selling their people’s labour at the price of slaves. To foreigners, no less! Some of the most racist people in the world! But why?
As part of a long-term plan to overthrow the West using capitalism, its own invention. Capitalism’s weakness is the honesty of white men, also why ‘free trade’ is BS. Other races prize lying to outsiders, whether you call it taqiyya or etiquette, where they suddenly stop inviting you round if you get fired. The people who seem most polite are lying, they’re hiding something.
It’s been gagging for this shot since the Industrial Revolution, and two world wars weakened us all nicely.
To sacrifice a few generations in the name of their collectivism, indulge in the West goodies but be not of it. To send some r-types overseas to settle and become key figures in politics (this is happening in America as we speak, a Red tide rises) and I already linked to the Economist ages ago predicting WHEN, not IF, but when China will overtake the US economy.
Most people would read that and go back to crying in their cornflakes about feminism.
It’s all connected. Would there be any Yellow Fever, without anime porn?
Would Western men who think they’re too smart for Hollywood porn, be so useless and lotus-eating, like the parasite single (bachelor) men of Japan, without it?
Back to the economy. When any country becomes a dominant power, it gets to play world police aka start as many wars as it likes.
Ask yourself: Is China more bloodthirsty than the US?
Has it dogmatically enforced its own culture, unlike the USA?
Has it tortured its own people to achieve?
Which tries to be the fairer?
What are the signs, you ask?
They learn Western culture e.g. the violin, religiously, to blend in.
But they do not expand the canon.
They punish their children to achieve at any cost, and top the league tables.
This allows them access to the prestige western schools, to befriend future politicians and observe any blackmail material firsthand.
What does a war need? Money and bodies.
Well, there’s a story that they could march all their fighting age men and encircle the world. They have the largest self-sustained population in the world. An excess of men. Anyone read on history knows there is only one means to get rid of a surplus of men. Who can sustain greater losses, all of the West or China?
OK, but what about one baby as a rule?
Why did they make that rule? They knew in their culture it would lead to a surplus of men. Why would a government obsessed with military investment need a huge stock of men to outnumber their main capitalist competition? They’re being trained, and not in factories.
Asia is obsessed with STEM and the military.
Why? Well, engineers and doctors are the two occupations critical to any war effort.
Ideally, you want to train your people overseas, use up their resources while building connections to exploit as informants later, and then extract them back home, depriving the enemy of key workers to subsistence peace-time level.
Gee, which race has a near-monopoly on those two occupations?
But people who read foreign papers will know they changed the baby rule recently.
Again, I ask you.
Two babies. This is interesting. It means the fighting age culled population will have sufficient females (baby 2) to breed with. It all fits.
The Marxism of China still encourages child-bearing, but the grandparents retain a prominent role to care unlike the West aka Baby Boomers.
People have been spoiling for a war since the 80s, Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, all just paper targets.
There are many economic unions and these libertarian experiments (inc. the EU) are, whether they know it or not, pawns in a wider game, the leagues before WW3. You need the upper hand before the game starts, and that’s why nobody wants to start it. The US is not the strongest player, it’s the UK because we can push the US based on our unique geography and naval supremacy. However, the US doesn’t know which enemy will rise up next, or believes in arrogance nobody will dare challenge it (naive) based on two wars it lucked out of. They can’t attack everyone.
That’s why Hitler lost.
Russia and China are in an economic alliance together, I forget which one. The US is not.
That is why both Russia and China have been buying up gold.
You only need that for one thing as a nation.
A gold standard.
China has been faking its gold exports, look up the ones pictured with a Panda hallmark.
Why do that? Aren’t they our friends?
They’ve been taking over cyberspace too. Most hacks now come from Asia, not Russia.
Why need gold practically? It can be used in electronics, especially high-tech war equipment.
They have a lot of men to equip.
If they run out, they can always use some older women. Thanks, feminism!
If China announces it’s moving to a gold standard, the USA will be forced to default.
I believe this may be the black swan you’ve all been looking for?
The EU is backed by the IMF, whose traders include Deutsche Bank, close to open failure.
Like Lehman Brothers in 2007.
UK gilts are bought off the backs of nothing, you’re supposed to trade heavily in gilts during times of war. As in, we’re fuck out of options.
The bubbles accruing on top one another for decades, sped up since ’08, will go at once like dominos. Where do we owe this money, ultimately? Not so much the Jews, although yes historically. All roads lead to China, they keep buying up Western debt, ostensibly for ‘social power’ and out of the goodness of their commie little hearts.
I wonder if we can learn anything about massive indebtedness from the Weimar Republic.
These people poison their own baby formula and don’t withdraw it from the market. They don’t care about one another (beyond direct blood relations) and they hate us.
Russia wants to be able to trade with them. This requires gold. People like Putin watch commodities over the Forex.
I don’t often talk shop or economics but this next piece is illustrative.
What’s the immigration rate of China?
So, if a series of riots were to take place based on new, entitled ‘citoyenne’ … we’d be too busy dealing with civil war (4th generation) to consider the mere possibility of another.
Does Crimea make more sense now?
How about in light of the fact that China’s greatest enemy, the Japanese, are being antagonized by North Korea as China’s bitch?
Why do that on their behalf, draw fire like that?
It doesn’t many any sense. If you’re too close to the people who hold a grudge like the Middle Eastern population only with slightly more common sense.
Which countries have retained their culture, yet appeared right-on to embrace multiculturalism?
Even Israel can’t claim that, they’re losing key demographic territory to Palestine. They’re over. Finished.
China, meanwhile, has about a billion. It can afford espionage, brain drain to export and cuddle up to the natives.
It spreads all sorts of rumours about how superior their women are, truly feminine (fake).
India will side with whoever pays them, it has a surplus of men, China has been purchasing Africa in such a ballsy colonialist move I’m astounded nobody has mentioned it.
Africa is key territory for manufacturing weapons. That’s why British Empire.
Natural resources, vital elements.
I do know more, much more, but alas, I can’t really say atm. This is all quite easy to check. The Red Scare is aimed at the wrong target, the Russians are broadly white, Christian and share our culture, including our art.
Who retains their own ‘art’ but appropriates Western culture down to our clothes and eyelids?
..Who sells the dinghies to the ‘refugee’ invasion?
I’ll drop this for now. I’ve been working on these premises for a long time, they’re accurate. I am still here and still thinking, just longer term than the stark majority of shitposters.
Look around. All I ask of you.
I’ll just leave these here. No reason. It’s all a coincidence.
“”China’s international surge of state-driven investments in emerging technologies should put the United States and our allies on notice,””
“”Once we became a portfolio company of these Chinese investors, they helped with opening doors in China … where the business community really relies on connections you build there.””
“”We are not worried to take Chinese money over U.S. money,” said Bar-Zeev of IronSource. “If you can deliver, there are endless opportunities.””
The EU is a distraction. The future flag is…
The G8 is nothing.
Alliances are everything.
Source: Sassy Socialist Memes
Muh Fascism! Because it’s only fascism when white working class people do it!
“We just want wealth taxes and to take away your physical right to self defense!”
But concentration camp memes are so terrible?
The plan behind mass immigration, aside from the rape and murder angle.
It’s literally incitement of sedition, treason etc.
It’s a form of Cloward-Piven too.
“Everyone who disagrees with me is a FASCIST!”
What was Nazi short for again? I mean, these people do want to reform the NATION state.
Marxists don’t have right-wing friends.
Actually, yeah, fuck him. Ban guns for his own people but sell them abroad?
They have a gigantic priggish chip on their shoulder with everyone, but they can’t throw a punch and they don’t expect people to defend themselves from physical assault?
Is the joke that nobody asks?
They’re not even denying it anymore.
Outright endorsement of murder. No wonder they like terrorists.
Has anyone seen a Marxist who was actually a worker? Like, a blue-collar one?
Marxist logic: inciting violence against anyone who disagrees with them, anyone disagreeing with them wants to incite violence if you disagree with them
Communism fails because labour isn’t equally valuable. And when they say everyone should work, what about the disabled? Where are they? And then, what about the hours worked? If a worker chooses to be more productive over the rest? Finally, how does that alter the IQ bell curve whatsoever? Men need more calories than women, but under Communism they’d only be allowed the female ration. That’s all Communist is, dressed up rations and slave labour. If getting rich were easy these people would’ve done it already.
None of them want to set up a commune, a real, actual commune that makes everything from scratch – that’s Amish. How does it change the fact that some people are totally lazy? What happens to them? What about the worker’s right to refuse the state? Morally, none of this works, and you can tell nobody involved in these theories even worked in a factory because workers refuse things all the time. Humans compete too, that’s the nature argument. It’s Darwin? So what do you do about the competitive workers? Since reducing their labour would be unlikely, stealing their labour against their will is exactly what capitalists do, according to them. What about engineers building the technology, they’d own it, as their labour! If they exchange it or merely the surplus, is that not capitalism? What if 51% of the population don’t want Communism? Don’t they have a right to revolt against their oppressors? Otherwise it’s fascist, isn’t it? Not to mention, some cultures can’t handle systems that probably rely on altruism genetics.
Imagine MENA. Picture it. Finally, how is calling someone a class traitor realistically different than calling them a race traitor?
For someone to win, another person has to lose. Welcome to adulthood.
I don’t see these college morons backing the idea of banning grades, since that’s unequal.
People miss how beautiful that expression is. However, in specific cases, they should be able to break it down precisely why or they themselves have no reply, no argument, simply an assertion.
You have no requirement to answer a non-question, it’s a habit of socializing that we speak upon the completion of a sentence, it doesn’t require that sentence have merit. The Burden of Proof rests on the initial speaker, still.
Yet it can’t be used to outright deny or dismiss without having a specific reason why.
Meanwhile, the only way to effectively deal with r-types, ignore them, however loudly they scream.
You only protect your own, but they have made it clear they are against you. Don’t lift a finger.
They say strength is bad until they want you to use it on their behalf.
Hey, if they’re so strong without their weapons, if their arguments have the same calibre as a bullet, go right on ahead and let them stand independently, you oppressive shitlord, and die that way if necessary. It’s what they would’ve wanted.
If evil imports evil, what is there to save?
Yourself, is the answer to that question.
Self-interest is rational. Pathological altruism is insanity.
You help those who would help you, the other side of the golden rule. Darwin’s rules. Sacrifice for people who would sacrifice you is patriotism dialed up to the incredible level of a cartoon character.
I swear most of Molly’s job is talking down the autistic from their pedestal of self-righteous stupidity.
If anyone deserves the Rasputin treatment, it’s a terrorist. Thankfully, your taxes go to pay people with guns already. The Parliament attacker guy? Shot, if memory serves, by a white guy with glasses. In a country that stupidly restricted guns. Even we don’t need you, Gun Bro. If the State can’t do the basic thing of shooting the bad guys for us…
I’ve never, ever heard of a liberal defending a conservative from any attack, ever.
They are not like you. They do not like you. Partially because you would defend them, implicitly stating they’re too weak to do it themselves. If you respect them as adults, leave them be. Let them live (and die) free. You are not their precious State, you have no duty to them, you are not getting paid, that is not your job ~z-snap~. You can’t play hero to two villains. They have engineered this setup on purpose. By importing violent left-wingers, they get the distraction to sneak off (reward of cowardice: survival) and the claim to victory (reward of victory). They literally do not lose.
If they don’t value their own safety, why should you?
America is too diverse to be united. You have the Diverse States of America.
He’s wrong about signalling (thinking) as a sign of tribe. Anyone can signal, its value is nil. How many of those diverse callers would help him, if he needed it? The odds are against, aren’t they? There are plenty of r-types signalling K as the idea spreads to new groups and creeps into mainstream awareness. The other day I heard a random cafe-owner say, “I want to protect this country, I’m like a wolf.” R-types invade by signalling. It’s a social invasion, they’re the fifth column, the barbarians sacking Rome from the inside, a swarm of locusts crying out as they hit you. History has taught us the hard way that ideological unity comes from genetic homogeneity.
The culture war is one of ideas. The weapon is a meme. A tiny little piece of information, a snippet of truth.
Signallers are, more often than not, liars.
They signal whatever ‘virtue’ is powerful, hoping for scraps from that table.
They are the begging dogs of society, asking you to hunt for them. It’s like every time Roosh calls for “someone! do something!” and his little internet boyfriends scurry to rescue the damsel and White Knights whatever he asks for. What are you, his wife? At least “think of the children!” defends the helpless. Adults have no business defending other adults. They rise and fall on their own merit, raised or dashed on their own petard.
K-society says: They do it themselves or it doesn’t get done.
R-society? It’s very espionage, ultra deceptive.
They offer you friendship while holding a knife in their other hand. They extend an olive branch first because it’s less effort, not because they like you or believe in the healing power of metaphor. There is a bargain they author, that you never asked for, and if you don’t like it, the carrot, they’ll ‘offer’ the stick. This is called a con. Con artists rely on confidence and trust. Virtue signallers rely on confidence and trust…
They want control over you, that is their power, to wiggle you like a little puppet.
In a victim culture, they are the biggest victims. In a K-shift, they are magically K-leaning.
Occam says: It’s all a lie.
I warned you, years ago. I knew these interlopers would pop up like fleas.
They don’t mind you dancing the right-wing jig as long as it’s to their exact tune.
Guess which is which.
If your friends are your enemies, you’ll never succeed. How to test?
A k-type invented the expression: actions speak louder than words. Until I see you sacrifice for this tribe, it owes nothing to you. If all you have are words, speak to the birds.
Just because someone is smoke-signalling your tribe doesn’t mean they’re on your side. Indeed, this makes it less likely, a friend doesn’t feel the need to keep reminding you they’re not a foe, not a threat, like they’re anticipating something…
DO NOT TRUST A DODGY SIGNAL.
The incongruence should ping to you. What’s in it for you?
In the super-complex theories of strategy, this is called A Trap. It’s a primitive form of distraction by claiming Ally while wearing the coat of your enemy to cuckold him for whatever reason before attacking when factors are on your side and you can turn your coat back and show your true colours. This is the problem with games like chess, where the colours never change sides because they were bribed or got bored. You never get betrayed in chess because the enemy never falters and it’s all very polite and open, two equal lines fairly opposing one another with Queensberry rules. That was 2nd generation warfare, we’re on four. Then again, maybe it’s a commentary on the reality that a leopard can’t change its spots. Who knows? I certainly don’t.
“Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.”
They don’t fully quote it for some strange reason. The Bible is actually very witty.
Ask – why do they want your trust? Why aren’t they doing literally anything else? What’s their game?
It’s a great way to buy time when you know you’d lose in a fair fight.
If this was the 15th century, a ship running up your flag is probably pirates.
And they won’t kill you with rum.
Newsflash: BAD GUYS LIE. THEY LIE OR THEY WON’T FOOL YOU LONG ENOUGH TO WIN.
Back to terrorism. All the way back, centuries and centuries and centuries, like the ideas.
Self-proclaimed liberals have a lot in common with the mythological ‘moderate Muslim’; that is to say, they will claim to be loving and giving until they have power and numbers to be the opposite of those things.
The ‘American Indian’ only gave with the expectation of receiving more in future.
A liberal is a dictator waiting to happen. Biding their time until everyone else has disarmed and made nice.
They know exactly what they are doing. That is what guys like these do not get. Everyone else is slowly waking up. We make memes.
“So if I’m understanding Stefan’s argument correctly it is: “While you certainly have the right to defend yourself, you have zero obligation to defend anyone else against a threat.” Is that the argument you are taking issue with? If so, what is your counterargument? If there is an obligation to defend others where does it come from?”
They want all conservatives to rush to protect them, like the police. While we are occupied, they survive and screw over the next batch of rueful idiots. The type who, at the Gates of Saint Peter, would claim the moral victory is more important.
The self-styled ‘liberals’ scoff at loyalty to children, nuclear family and country… until it comes to discussions of noblesse oblige (without class???), pensions, the social contract and human rights (without property rights). Then it’s all about universalism, collectivism and helping those who can’t/won’t help themselves. They are morally relative, liberal with logic ….wrong, in bad faith (100% deliberate). What they say is usually ‘not an argument’ because it comes from a hypocrite (no-proof), a deceiver (valid use, not ad hominem) and they argue it from bad faith, really pushing something else entirely under the radar.
They are loyal to their own body, especially the neck. They don’t want to save the pandas, they want to save their own skin.
In common speech here, they’re ‘trying it on’ i.e. they know they’re lying to get what they want and disappear when their half comes due, but they’re hoping you don’t know that.
All their virtue signals are overt pleas to get, without giving.
Argument and clause. Devil and detail. Plan and plot.
>HELP THE OUTGROUP! THE INDIVIDUAL IS NOTHING TO THE GROUP! SACRIFICE AT ALL COSTS!
>…STOP DEFINING THE INGROUP! THAT MODEL IS REDUNDANT AND EVIL!
and that, my friends, is why we mock them.
See: Why mockery?
It is also why you shouldn’t trust ambassadors. 300 was right.
That diverse cast of people calling into Molyneux are attempting to appease him while he gains power (they smell a whiff and cannot yet crush him) and then to advise him to his destruction once he has gained it (and after they have gained his trust). That is what high-IQ r-types DO. The toxic friends of the world. The fairweather traitors and degenerate preachers.
Clinically, they have many names. Sociopath tops the list.
Question a normal person: #crickets
Question a sociopath: you are (lie), (lie) and (lie), evil person! Appease me! Account for your sin!
They’ve found a scapegoat to slaughter.
Sociopaths especially detest those who describe their tactics to the masses for protection.
You can’t defame the truth, though, can you?
Why did Labour lose the last two elections? Not just the one after Rotherham?
The strongest evidence for conspiracy comes from one of Labour’s own. Andrew Neather, a previously unheard-of speechwriter for Blair, Straw and Blunkett, popped up with an article in the Evening Standard in October 2009 which gave the game away.
Immigration, he wrote, ‘didn’t just happen; the deliberate policy of Ministers from late 2000…was to open up the UK to mass immigration’.
That’s beyond gerrymandering into outright voter fraud.
He was at the heart of policy in September 2001, drafting the landmark speech by the then Immigration Minister Barbara Roche, and he reported ‘coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended – even if this wasn’t its main purpose – to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date’.
Instead it’s proven Enoch correct.
Multiculturalism has failed.
Swedish feminists are moving out of No-go zones full of Muslims they voted to welcome.
That seemed, even to him, a manoeuvre too far.
Tony Blair removed the death penalty for treason……
look it up…….
The result is now plain for all to see. Even Blair’s favourite think tank, the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), commented recently: ‘It is no exaggeration to say that immigration under New Labour has changed the face of the country.’
easily taken back
they leave as soon the economy properly tanks
or they’re drafted into a war
whichever comes first
the interesting part will be going after what they owe this country, once they’ve left
never piss off the white people, it’s world war or nothing
yet they treat us like simpering ninnies
like the colonies thing was a coincidence
It is not hard to see why Labour’s own apparatchiks supported the policy. Provided that the white working class didn’t cotton on, there were votes in it.
Now they’ve lost the WWC.
Not to earn the core voter base back.
But to continue betraying them by importing rapists for their daughters.
The WWC is proud, in a word. They do not forget grudges over generations.
WWC votes are often the Kingmaker in FPTP. That’s why Labour backed altering it.
Research into voting patterns conducted for the Electoral Commission after the 2005 general election found that 80 per cent of Caribbean and African voters had voted Labour, while only about 3 per cent had voted Conservative and roughly 8 per cent for the Liberal Democrats.
The Asian vote was split about 50 per cent for Labour, 10 per cent Conservatives and 15 per cent Liberal Democrats.
That meets all the criteria for treason.
Giving people citizenship on the probable basis of how they’ll vote.