Donnadogsoth

Good job! The goal should be not just to block "privilege talk" but to counter it with antinomies. Only respective coloured races have the privilege of working together for their own benefit. My "white privilege" amounts to the privilege of dying out as a race, and all the discomfiture and psychic pain for me personally that that implies.

Worthwhile. Get your hammering negative voices out and replace them with those of people who matter.

If you're not willing to sacrifice anything for the sake of mankind, then why are you worried? Just find your favourite pleasant distractions, turn on, tune out, and press PLAY.

Suicide over a stubbed toe...

Once again pro-circumcision talk revolves around people being too stupid to clean themselves properly.

Have you tried prayer? Let me see if I read you: You're an intellectual, thoughtful guy and you've gotten yourself into an existential funk relating to an alienation from people and misgivings over your contribution to the race, both of which make you unhappy. Let me give you my own situation: I have overcome a welter of unhappiness through slow accretion of theories, facts, and values which have translated into more positive personal connections with people and a better sense that I am contributing to something immortal and being part of something greater than myself. Specifically, in broadest terms, this means understanding and defending Western civilisation from being dismembered by the traitors, barbarians, and the inert (or actively suicidal and viciously hateful) masses. The paradox is, why should I do this if it were to make me unhappy? I could do it if it make me unhappy at a lower level, but happy at a higher level of love for one's fellows, if I knew it was contributing to all-round (lower and higher) level happiness for other people, either now or in the future. So there is a concept of sacrifice for the sake of love, for the sake of others' happiness, while hoping that you can find higher level love, all round happiness in this life. So, love. What do you love and what are you willing to sacrifice for it?

Smashing video. Looking forward to the rest, thinking about buying the book. To have a compassionate outsider analysing the white race helps debunk the liberal myth that the pro-white individual is, to be succinct, necessarily and gleefully in league with Satan. That Raymond holds out the possibility that whiteness is more than skin deep, more than just physically artistic but extending to neural artistic differences as well, is unexpected and promising. But, until I've heard the rest of his theory I can't comment on it any further. Thanks for posting this, PatrickC.

Ackh, wasn't Carravagio on commission? What difference does it make if the message is true?

I think feminism is such an unprincipled and bendy beast that it will instinctively move to protect its useful tools.

Anyone know of any other timeplace in history where a host culture's symbols were so spit on and rejected by the host culture itself?

Predatory homosexuals don't exist in the present media narrative. Your boys are perfectly safe.

Western language is being eaten by a humongous femiblob. This creature, which has emerged from a witches' brew of poisonous ideologies, has captured the citadels of our Universities and the halls of power alike. It declares itself progressive, humane, and evolutionary, and its advance appears inexorable. Yet it is none of these things. It is not progressive but regressive, shrinking our language base and attacking our culture whether high or popular. It is not humane, by stripping colour, contrast, and the ability to relate robustly to our fellows. And it is not evolutionary, but imposed by international socialist elites and their minions. In its drive for equality, it is destroying liberty. What its censorship is doing is raising the cost of being a man, a Christian*, a cisgender, a heterosexual, and someone of traditionally European ancestry. These things linger in the language normatively, but like a consumptive lingers. *I know most of you don't care about Christianity, but consider Christianity a canary in the culturally Marxist coal mine. Christian voices are among those fighting against the verbivore. What its goal is, is not to censor words but to censor people—to censor identity. It does this by snipping out our ability to detect and speak of differences, whether those differences are racial, sexual, body shape, or religious, except insofar as we use those carefully picked words and phrasing methods bearing the stamp of political approval. This is not freedom, and this is the beginning of censorship that will cull everything unfashionable from comic books, films, tv programmes, jokes, songs, plays, sculpture, art, philosophy, and religion. Whatever you like now, much less before, is potentially on the politically correct chopping block in the near future. Now, no amount of whinging will stop this. Nor will piecemeal defences. Logically shooting down the femiblob's particular word-choices hasn't stopped it. The logical bullets go plick-pluck-plick into its undulating folds and seal up without comment. But what if the whole agenda could be laid bare in its particulars, not in its generalities or in part? I propose this thread, therefore, to collect everything even remotely potentially objectionable whether obviously offensive or offensive only to the professional bellyacher, from words to film and tv and casting choices to books and music and comic books and art both classical and contemporary, so as to get a hold of things and see where we are headed if the femiblob's mobocratic/oligarchical censorship spills onward in its present trajectory. The more people can see what is coming, the more they can firm themselves up in defending their identities as Westerners by defending their language. Anyone game? THIS IS A LIST OF WORDS, NOT RECOMMENDATIONS MIGHT OFFEND EVERYBODY Popular Culture: coming up with a list of endangered words, By proxy: anything on these lists, Symbol: Swastika (left- or right-handed) MIGHT OFFEND JEWISH PEOPLE holocaust (lower-case H, used in reference to something other than the Holocaust), Holocaust (used in any way casually or disrespectfully), Hitler (used neutrally or otherwise non-negatively), Jew (aside from during Holocaust studies), kapo, kike, foreskinner MIGHT OFFEND CRIPPLED PEOPLE cripple, gimp, gimpy, blind, deaf, deaf-mute, deaf-and-dumb MIGHT OFFEND FAT PEOPLE BY CONTRAST thin, thin-skinned, skinny, slender, lissome, lithe, svelte, bony, rack of bones, sack of deer antlers, wiry, sinewy, light MIGHT OFFEND FAT PEOPLE fat, fatty, overweight, corpulent, fatso, tubby, chubby, chunky, obese, morbidly obese, heavy, lard-ass, lardy MIGHT OFFEND UGLY PEOPLE ugly, disfigured, deformed, ugly, repulsive, hideous, blemished, birthmarked, burned, old, wrinkly, sagging, venerable, ancient, craggy MIGHT OFFEND DOWN ON THEIR LUCK, HOMELESS, OR THOSE WITH HYGIENE ISSUES smelly, stinky, hobo, tramp, bum, wino, layabout, welfare queen, single mother MIGHT OFFEND LITTLE PEOPLE small, short, tiny, midget, shrimp, dwarf, diminutive MIGHT OFFEND INTELLECTUALS OR TECHNO SAVANTS, OR STUPID PEOPLE BY CONTRAST nerd, brain, brainer, browner, loser, geek MIGHT OFFEND MENTALLY RETARDED PEOPLE dummy (stupid, department store), idiot, imbecile, moron, stupid, silly, fool, foolish, retard (developmentally delayed, or to hold back, as when fighting a fire), retarded, retardant (fire extinguisher chemical) MIGHT OFFEND NON-STRAIGHT, NON-CISGENDER PEOPLE fag, faggot, homo, homosexual, flamer, dyke, queer, fairy, sodomite, lezzie, lesbo, tranny, she-male, transsexual, hermaphrodite, transvestite, fudge-packer, rump-rider, hetero, heterosexual, Also offensive: fag = British usage: “cigarette”, Also offensive: fagged = British usage: “exhausted”, Also offensive: faggot = “bundle of sticks”, Also offensive: queer = “unsettlingly strange”, Possibly offensive: “happy” = gay, OK: gay (except when used pejoratively), OK: lesbian, OK: queer (only if you are one) MIGHT OFFEND NON-CHRISTIANS Christ, Christian , Christianity, Jesus, God, Cross, Crucifixion, Resurrection, Yahweh, Jehovah, Holy Spirit, Holy Ghost, Symbol: Cross, Symbol: Crucifix, Symbol: Chi-Rho, Symbol: Red Cross, Symbol: White Cross on Hospital Helipad, OK: Allah, OK: God (only if you are non-Christian), OK: (coarse language) Jesus Christ, OK: Jesus Freak (put down for Christians), OK: religious nutjob MIGHT OFFEND NON-WHITES blush, red-faced, pinky (finger), Snow White, dusky, swarthy, slant-eyed, almond-eyed, big-lipped, big-nosed, black, brown, yellow, red, Indian (Western hemisphere), Phrase: “I'll be on you like white on rice”, tar baby, white-washing, lily white (innocent), white (pure, holy), master (master's degree, master-computer), slave (slaving away, slave master, slave-computer), help (as in “the help”), black (unless uttered by a black person), Negro (unless uttered by a black person), nigger (unless uttered by a black person), niga (unless uttered by a black person), nigga (unless uttered by a black person), paki, wop, chink, jap,wetback, Cinematography: reverse polarity making a white face black, Cinematography: blackface, Cinematography: yellowface, Cinematography: redface, Photography: camera work that doesn't lessen any feature-obscuring darkness of non-white faces, OK: casper (put-down), OK: lily (put-down), OK: cracker (put-down) MIGHT OFFEND NON-MALES manly, manliness, macho, machismo, male pride, he-man, muscleman, brawny-man, dude, stud, stud-muffin, , dick, cock, nuts, balls, butch, femme, lady, woman, dame, damsel, maiden, girly, chick, bitch, witch, harridan, harpy, broad, babe, baby, dudette, king, queen, master, mistress SOON TO OFFEND OUR RULERS, AND REPLACED BY...? white, cisgender, male, female, normal, typical, standard, strange, bizarre, unusual, odd, weird, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, queer, two-spirited, asexual, polysexual, polyamourous, father, husband, mother, wife

tl:dr version? Any highlights you'd like to share?

You might make polite inquiries about: taqiyya kaffir dhimmitude sex slavery minimum age of marriage cousin marriage House of Islam/House of War

I am not here. Only you are here, making you a solipsistic monad-denier.

Monadic reality exists independent of the senses but perceptual reality does not. Call it the wysiwyg theory, since all perception exists only in the mind of the observer. If you close your eyes and I hand you a banana, you may feel the banana and remember encountering other bananas, and so imagine what the colour of the banana will be when you open your eyes, but until you open them, the banana has no colour. Colour like all other measurements and experiences are internal to you the observer. Similar to this is the case of the numbers. How many numbers are there? You might be tempted to say infinitude. But this is not true. Numbers only exist when we apprehend them, and since there is no way for you to apprehend an infinitude of numbers, there cannot be an infinitude, but only the exact number you have counted. The raw truth is that there is a (1) monadic reality whereby things have perception and appetition (desire, will), but lack extension or physical attributes of any kind, and then there is (2) a wysiwyg reality whereby the latent perceptions in your mind are unfolded through your monadic contact with external monadic reality, and thus the material world springs into existence out of nothing. That the monads interact, and so in that sense a cause-and-effect relationship can be apprehended, and the existence of monads (souls) be intuited at all, is a function of the preëstablished harmony whereby all monads are arranged from the beginning of time to interact with each other as though they were influencing each other. In fact, however, they do not, but merely act as though they do. When your knife descends on the pear, the knife does not cut, but simply moves, and the pear is not cut, but simply divides. Your prayer of will-to-cut has been granted by the obliging action of the harmonious universe.

You presume existence exists apart from consciousness, for which we have no evidence, nor can we ever have. I am saying that there is no existence apart from consciousness, since everything we experience is a datum of our sensoria, intellect, or heart, all of which are irremovably conscious. Cf. Bishop Berkeley.

It goes back to Kepler talking about the intentions of the planetary orbits. Things fall because they want to fall. The materialist paradigm of "dead matter" is a matter of faith based on a narrowly anthropocentric view of the cosmos, that humanity is an archipelago of consciousness amid vast oceans of death. But this is not the basic datum that we have, which is that existence is conscious; we have, and can never have, a non-conscious perspective, so there is no reason to assign such to rocks. Rocks of course are not like us in our sapience or organic sentience. They appear to be "sparks" of consciousness, not fires such as we. The alternative to grapple with is that, given all sensory data is internal to our minds, then are there any objects (noumena) associated with such data (phenomena) that are purely sense data? Or is everything noumenal, everything "sparkish"?

Say you're in Grade 3 and you're known for stealing from your classmates. During Valentine's Day (remember those?) everyone in class makes a construction paper basket to hang on their desk to receive valentines. You notice a valentine on the floor, pick it up, read it and realise whom it belongs to. Just as you're conscientiously putting it back into the proper basket the teacher spots you, and you are busted for stealing. So with Merkel and the flag she obviously respects less than the paper for her fanny.

Interesting little video about the latest wonderful multicultural vibrancies (can you feel it!) going on in our helpfully self-hating Ge-e-e-ermany. 9 things Germans do to appease muslims https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2vgLipteEI

A rational entity doing rational things is less extraordinary than quantum randomess producing the Universe for no reason. I have heard people claim that the Universe was created by quantum randomness for no reason. What's the alternative? We have no evidence they do not. All we can tell is that they are uncommunicative and like following the laws of physics. What are you, anti-rock? Reason and evidence tells me the Universe operates according to reason, including not coming into existence for no reason. Reason and evidence tell me that consciousness is an irreducible quality of existence, which means that that rock over there is either conscious (at some level) or is purely a figment of my sensorium.

In a handstand the world looks upside down. Why doesn't it sound upside down, too?

Just a passing thought: "trigger" rhymes with a particular troublesome word that "triggers" some people. When will the word "trigger" itself "trigger" people and need to be replaced with a less "problematic" word?

The claim that something as complex as the Universe came into being out of nothing, for no reason, is in the running. Saying that me being a sentient, sapient being is less extraordinary than me being an automaton is so because of your paradigm. A primitive tribesman might say that you denying rocks and trees sentience is more extraordinary than believing the obvious truth that everything is ensouled. I think you need something more than gauging extraordinariness in order to decide on a paradigm, because the paradigm is what decides the gauge.

Well categorically there is sapient (human consciousness), sentient (animal consciousness), and then sub-sentient (inanimate or inorganic consciousness). Leibniz termed them spirit, soul, and monad. All have perception and appetition, but the monads are so "dimly lit" so to speak that they are mere sparks to the spirits' fire.