Eugenic

[Fashus Maximus]

1 hour ago, GatoVillano said:

''the state is runned by men'' you start your argument from a fallacy. 60% of voters are women.

The state is not run by voters. It is run by politicians and their bureaucrat underlings, which are mostly men.

1 hour ago, GatoVillano said:

Women live longer, they vote in their self interest and they have a lot of female groups that have strong ingroup preference that lobby for them.

Male* lobbyists

1 hour ago, GatoVillano said:

Why is it that every politician that gets elected need to remove rights from men and offer more rights to women? Why are men raped in divorce courts? Why is it that when a woman accuses a man is automatically guilty without due process? Why is it that men cant get child custody? Why do men pay in the system and that it women that benefits from this system? Why is it that men are sent to die in stupid wars while women stay home?

The answer to all of this becomes very clear when I re-write it as such:

"Why is it that every politician that gets elected need to remove rights from white men and offer more rights to non-white women? Why are white men raped in non-white divorce courts? Why is it that when a non-white woman accuses a white man is automatically guilty without due process? Why is it that white men cant get child custody? Why do white men pay in the system and that it non-white women that benefits from this system? Why is it that white men are sent to die in stupid Jewish wars while non-white women stay home?"

 

White politicians are disproportionately lobbied and funded by foreigners, and non-white politicians already have an in-group preference that is explicitly and openly anti-white. Those removal of rights disproportionately apply to white men to lower white birth rates (their openly stated goal). Also, those rights disproportionately benefit non-white women (again, foreign funding + in-group preference + open and explicit anti-white hatred / jealousy).

1 hour ago, GatoVillano said:

You know who holds the power when you know who cannot be criticized. And let me tell you, it aint men.

You most certainly can criticize white women, especially if they are married or not feminists. You can find at least one thing to criticize about every group, without much backlash.

The only group you cannot criticize whatsoever is Jews.

1 hour ago, GatoVillano said:

So rethink your comment and try not to start from an obvious fallacy. ty

While I do welcome counter-arguments, I don't think that simply assuming I haven't thought of my argument or assumption is a productive route to take.

[GatoVillano]

8 minutes ago, Fashus Maximus said:

The state is not run by voters. It is run by politicians and their bureaucrat underlings, which are mostly men.

Male* lobbyists

The answer to all of this becomes very clear when I re-write it as such:

"Why is it that every politician that gets elected need to remove rights from white men and offer more rights to non-white women? Why are white men raped in non-white divorce courts? Why is it that when a non-white woman accuses a white man is automatically guilty without due process? Why is it that white men cant get child custody? Why do white men pay in the system and that it non-white women that benefits from this system? Why is it that white men are sent to die in stupid Jewish wars while non-white women stay home?"

 

White politicians are disproportionately lobbied and funded by foreigners, and non-white politicians already have an in-group preference that is explicitly and openly anti-white. Those removal of rights disproportionately apply to white men to lower white birth rates (their openly stated goal). Also, those rights disproportionately benefit non-white women (again, foreign funding + in-group preference + open and explicit anti-white hatred / jealousy).

You most certainly can criticize white women, especially if they are married or not feminists. You can find at least one thing to criticize about every group, without much backlash.

The only group you cannot criticize whatsoever is Jews.

While I do welcome counter-arguments, I don't think that simply assuming I haven't thought of my argument or assumption is a productive route to take.

You are wrong again. The democrats have destroyed the black family as well by giving incentives for black women to become single mothers. This leads to black men paying through the nose for children they will not know. The state, you know, the same state that women vote in majority for and elects, as sent so many blacks to die in vietnam and other stupid wars. What you are doing is a stupid old intersectional feminist trick of projection. Saying that its all about white men. No, its all men. And you are the cause of everything that is wrong in the west. You, as a woman and as a feminist. You have destroyed families; you are the reason why kids grow up without a father that leads them to crime, unemployment and suicide; you are the reason why the courts are bias to women; you are the reason we have so much dept; you are the reason why american men went to die in europe during WW1 and 2; YOU EVEN ELECTED WOODROW WILSON THAT MADE AMERICA JOIN THE WAR (because he gave you the right to vote. the death of millions of men is nothing, voting is more important); you are the reason kids are indoctrinated in schools with leftist bullshit.

You lady, you are what is wrong in the world. And the world would be a better place for EVERYONE of every genders and colors if you left the planet.

Thanks for listening =)

[Donnadogsoth]

17 hours ago, Fashus Maximus said:

The state is not run by voters. It is run by politicians and their bureaucrat underlings, which are mostly men.

 

The government is elected by the voters.  If sufficient numbers of voters want real change (e.g., an orange president), they'll get it.  It's the mental fog most people are in that indicates the real power, for now, is in the legacy media and educational institutions.  How do we cut that fog?

[Fashus Maximus]

1 hour ago, Donnadogsoth said:

How do we cut that fog?

What is the fog covering up? You say the real power is legacy media, and educational institutions. Would you say that the financial system falls into that category? Military industrial complex? Lobbies? Rent-seekers?

Do you think that running or owning these institutions relies on IQ? If that were so, why would they rely on expensive licenses to keep out competition, when high IQ is already a rarity? Perhaps it is not IQ - but rather - personal connections / nepotism that puts you in charge of these institutions? Do you think that these nepotists pick high IQ folks to run these institutions when they have no one to compete with and when their performance has usually little to no relationship to their income? Or perhaps, they prefer to put their own buddies in charge?

So let's go back to the fog analogy. What is the fog covering up? Take a look at these nepotists. You notice anything about them? A pattern? Let's name some names, shall we? Perhaps you'll notice a pattern: Rothschild, Rockefeller, Warburg, Kissinger, Soros, Volcker, Summer, Blankfein, Greenspan, Yellen, Bernanke, Strauss-Kahn, Cohen, Lehmann, Goldman, Sachs, Lerner, Zuckerberg, Schmidt, Weinstein, Hertzel, Luxemberg, Rosenthal, Sackler, Lenin, Trotsky, Masaryk, Juncker, Benesch, Seipel, Baker, Adenauer, Schuman, Schumer, Schwarzman, Bilderberg....

Institutions that rely on nepotism. Mostly run or owned by individuals from a single ethnicity with the highest ethnocentrism known to man, ever. Another coincidence: this ethnicity cannot be criticized. Another coincidence: their history is illegal to question. Another coincidence: it is illegal to boycott their host country. Another coincidence: they have been kicked out of over 100 countries.

A couple flukes make a coincidence. Many coincidences make a pattern. How do we cut that fog? We either name the problem by its proper name, or we get out of the way of those who have the balls to do so, i.e. the Alt Right.

[Fashus Maximus]

On 11/28/2017 at 5:28 PM, GatoVillano said:

The democrats have destroyed the black family as well by giving incentives for black women to become single mothers.

Welfare may skew the incentives in favor of single motherhood. However, blacks have always been pre-disposed for R-selected behavior.

On 11/28/2017 at 5:28 PM, GatoVillano said:

This leads to black men paying through the nose for children they will not know.

Those stats are about the black men they actually found and served with divorce notices. In the majority of cases, those black men go off-the-grid; they pay nothing.

On 11/28/2017 at 5:28 PM, GatoVillano said:

The state, you know, the same state that women vote in majority for and elects, as sent so many blacks to die in vietnam and other stupid wars.

Only 10.6% of Vitenam vets are black. 88.6% are white.

On 11/28/2017 at 5:28 PM, GatoVillano said:

What you are doing is a stupid old intersectional feminist trick of projection. Saying that its all about white men. No, its all men.

What am I projecting? I didn't say it's about white men. I said it's about the openly stated goal of Jewish communists to eradicate the white race. Half the equation is sending white men to die in Jewish wars. The other half is convincing impressionable young white women that it is empowering to be a whore, and they've got nothing to worry about: when they hit 30yo and 2+ partners, they will totally be able to get with a 6 ft tall, James Bond billionaire with abs who is sane and won't cheat on them.

No one is trying to eradicate any other race. It's only whites that have to deal with this stuff.

On 11/28/2017 at 5:28 PM, GatoVillano said:

And you are the cause of everything that is wrong in the west. You, as a woman and as a feminist. You have destroyed families; you are the reason why kids grow up without a father that leads them to crime, unemployment and suicide; you are the reason why the courts are bias to women; you are the reason we have so much dept; you are the reason why american men went to die in europe during WW1 and 2; YOU EVEN ELECTED WOODROW WILSON THAT MADE AMERICA JOIN THE WAR (because he gave you the right to vote. the death of millions of men is nothing, voting is more important); you are the reason kids are indoctrinated in schools with leftist bullshit.

You lady, you are what is wrong in the world. And the world would be a better place for EVERYONE of every genders and colors if you left the planet.

For the record:

- I'm a man

- I'm anti-feminist

- I'm anti-Jewish-Wars

- I'm pro-family

- I'm anti-divorce

- I'm anti-generational-debt

- I'm against the U.S. ever fighting in WWI, WWII. My family was destroyed because of WWII. My great-grandfathers fought for the Axis and died fighting the Brits and Soviets in defense of the Persian Corridor and the invasion of Gilan. Only the last generation of my family has been able to regain affluence, and that is very recently.

- I'm anti-leftist-indoctrination

Basically: I'm Alt Right. Sounds like you agree with this view. I literally don't understand this last quote of yours. 

[GatoVillano]

9 hours ago, Fashus Maximus said:

Welfare may skew the incentives in favor of single motherhood. However, blacks have always been pre-disposed for R-selected behavior.

Those stats are about the black men they actually found and served with divorce notices. In the majority of cases, those black men go off-the-grid; they pay nothing.

Only 10.6% of Vitenam vets are black. 88.6% are white.

What am I projecting? I didn't say it's about white men. I said it's about the openly stated goal of Jewish communists to eradicate the white race. Half the equation is sending white men to die in Jewish wars. The other half is convincing impressionable young white women that it is empowering to be a whore, and they've got nothing to worry about: when they hit 30yo and 2+ partners, they will totally be able to get with a 6 ft tall, James Bond billionaire with abs who is sane and won't cheat on them.

No one is trying to eradicate any other race. It's only whites that have to deal with this stuff.

For the record:

- I'm a man

- I'm anti-feminist

- I'm anti-Jewish-Wars

- I'm pro-family

- I'm anti-divorce

- I'm anti-generational-debt

- I'm against the U.S. ever fighting in WWI, WWII. My family was destroyed because of WWII. My great-grandfathers fought for the Axis and died fighting the Brits and Soviets in defense of the Persian Corridor and the invasion of Gilan. Only the last generation of my family has been able to regain affluence, and that is very recently.

- I'm anti-leftist-indoctrination

Basically: I'm Alt Right. Sounds like you agree with this view. I literally don't understand this last quote of yours. 

I'm sorry, when you replaced everything I said with white and men, you sounded like a intersectional feminist. But, yeah, everything I said doesnt only apply to white men. It applies to all men. So, I'm sorry, you dont have to leave the planet =P

[Donnadogsoth]

22 hours ago, Fashus Maximus said:

What is the fog covering up? You say the real power is legacy media, and educational institutions. Would you say that the financial system falls into that category? Military industrial complex? Lobbies? Rent-seekers?

Do you think that running or owning these institutions relies on IQ? If that were so, why would they rely on expensive licenses to keep out competition, when high IQ is already a rarity? Perhaps it is not IQ - but rather - personal connections / nepotism that puts you in charge of these institutions? Do you think that these nepotists pick high IQ folks to run these institutions when they have no one to compete with and when their performance has usually little to no relationship to their income? Or perhaps, they prefer to put their own buddies in charge?

So let's go back to the fog analogy. What is the fog covering up? Take a look at these nepotists. You notice anything about them? A pattern? Let's name some names, shall we? Perhaps you'll notice a pattern: Rothschild, Rockefeller, Warburg, Kissinger, Soros, Volcker, Summer, Blankfein, Greenspan, Yellen, Bernanke, Strauss-Kahn, Cohen, Lehmann, Goldman, Sachs, Lerner, Zuckerberg, Schmidt, Weinstein, Hertzel, Luxemberg, Rosenthal, Sackler, Lenin, Trotsky, Masaryk, Juncker, Benesch, Seipel, Baker, Adenauer, Schuman, Schumer, Schwarzman, Bilderberg....

Institutions that rely on nepotism. Mostly run or owned by individuals from a single ethnicity with the highest ethnocentrism known to man, ever. Another coincidence: this ethnicity cannot be criticized. Another coincidence: their history is illegal to question. Another coincidence: it is illegal to boycott their host country. Another coincidence: they have been kicked out of over 100 countries.

A couple flukes make a coincidence. Many coincidences make a pattern. How do we cut that fog? We either name the problem by its proper name, or we get out of the way of those who have the balls to do so, i.e. the Alt Right.

I don't disagree that it's a significant pattern you describe, but I do disagree that it's the top of the pyramid.  I think the Jews are being manipulated by the chiefly British oligarchy, the same oligarchy that produced both Karl Marx and Adam Smith, the one which has been trying since the Revolutionary War to retake America, first militarily until the end of the (British-backed) Confederacy, then financially through the Federal Reserve and Wall Street.  The Jews may seem powerful, even gloating, but the real underlying emotion with them is fear:  fear that the white elephant will roll over and crush them again. Thus, they've done everything in their power to cement themselves into Western society, by working to criminalise or at least make taboo criticism of the Holocaust, by getting their fingers in the financial and professional and government and media and educational pies, and by promoting coloured colonisation of white countries so they can disappear in the multicultural/racial crowd.

The Alt Right's problem isn't ballsiness, it's that they don't think big enough--Faustian enough. The world is increasingly connected and needs to be more connected if it is going to lift itself up to a higher economic platform than before. Just as the American railroad building program created the America as we know it geographically and economically, so the world needs a worldwide program of infrastructural development of the type currently being worked on by China with its $4 to 20 trillion dollar Belt and Road Initiative.

The Alt Right doesn't know or doesn't care about this, and yet it is Faustian in its nature to the core. If we want to migrate into Outer Space, if we want to turn off the colonisation taps by giving people a reason not to abandon their own countries, if we want to save our economy and prevent a general breakdown crisis, these sorts of megaprojects and development of the wastelands and interiors of Earth are the way to go.

However, the people (including many Jews) on board with this vision man:  as dedicating himself to the economic and high cultural development of the planet, don't care about the white race. Which leads me to question: does the white race matter? Does the Universe care if we go extinct? I have a thought on this but would like to see what you think.

[Fashus Maximus]

On 11/30/2017 at 11:43 AM, Donnadogsoth said:

does the white race matter? Does the Universe care if we go extinct?

The white race matters to racially conscious whites. As for the universe, it is obviously not a sentient being to which anything can matter to, so I'm assuming you don't mean universe literally. What exactly do you mean by Universe? People in general?

On 11/30/2017 at 11:43 AM, Donnadogsoth said:

I do disagree that it's the top of the pyramid.  I think the Jews are being manipulated by the chiefly British oligarchy, the same oligarchy that produced both Karl Marx and Adam Smith

I must say, your angle on Marx and Smith is new to me. What do you mean the oligarchy created them? How and who exactly did that?

Also, my argument to support Jews being on the top of the pyramid (of the rent-seeking economy) is the "follow the money" principle. With that in mind, how do you explain that the modern state of affairs uniquely benefits wealthy Jews at the expense of Europeans? If Europeans were on top of this pyramid, would it not be Jews who were losing out?

On 11/30/2017 at 11:43 AM, Donnadogsoth said:

The Alt Right's problem isn't ballsiness, it's that they don't think big enough--Faustian enough. The world is increasingly connected and needs to be more connected if it is going to lift itself up to a higher economic platform than before. [snip]

The Alt Right doesn't know or doesn't care about this, and yet it is Faustian in its nature to the core. If we want to migrate into Outer Space, if we want to turn off the colonisation taps by giving people a reason not to abandon their own countries, if we want to save our economy and prevent a general breakdown crisis, these sorts of megaprojects and development of the wastelands and interiors of Earth are the way to go.

By Faustian, I assume mean: "made or done for present gain without regard for future cost or consequences" (Merriam-Webster)

Do you mean to say that the Alt Right is focused on short-term gain without regard for future consequences?

[Donnadogsoth]

53 minutes ago, Fashus Maximus said:

 

The white race matters to racially conscious whites. As for the universe, it is obviously not a sentient being to which anything can matter to, so I'm assuming you don't mean universe literally. What exactly do you mean by Universe? People in general?

I mean God. Did God create the white race only to have it die—or even to have it be sacrificed on the altar of international brotherhood? What kind of God would do such a thing?

I must say, your angle on Marx and Smith is new to me. What do you mean the oligarchy created them? How and who exactly did that?

Surely it's not a coincidence that both of the greatest philosophical influences on the Twentieth Century came from Imperial Britain? Consider also:

“Whatever else Trier's Karl Marx represented, Marxism, as an ideology and doctrine, was, in its cultural characteristics, an outgrowth of the emerging British Empire whose power, established in the Paris Treaty of February 1763, had been consolidated by the outcome of the French Revolution and Napoleonic wars. Marxism as a doctrine was a phenomenon whose axiomatic features had been pre-shaped by the British Foreign Office's Jeremy Bentham, and, more immediately, by Bentham's successor and British asset Marx's actual owner, Lord Palmerston.[3]”

and,

“Whereas the development of what London asset Marx came to recognize as a system of British political economy, occurred chiefly under the impetus of Britain's notorious Lord Shelburne, after the February 1763 Treaty of Paris, with Shelburne's assignment to his lackey Adam Smith: to scour France for intelligence on economy which might be used against the already significant development within the North American English colonies, and in France. Hence, Adam Smith's 1776 tract against the U.S. Declaration of Independence, Smith's so-called Wealth of Nations, was largely a work of plagiarism, by Smith and others, of the doctrines of the French Physiocrats Quesnay and Turgot.”

Discussed further here.

How the Liberals Tried To Make Engels' Monkey Into a Man

 

And also,

 

The "Jewish" Conspiracy is British Imperialism

Also, my argument to support Jews being on the top of the pyramid (of the rent-seeking economy) is the "follow the money" principle. With that in mind, how do you explain that the modern state of affairs uniquely benefits wealthy Jews at the expense of Europeans? If Europeans were on top of this pyramid, would it not be Jews who were losing out?

There are no wealthy Europeans?

By Faustian, I assume mean: "made or done for present gain without regard for future cost or consequences" (Merriam-Webster)

Do you mean to say that the Alt Right is focused on short-term gain without regard for future consequences?

No, by “Faustian” I mean Oswald Spengler's usage, referring to the West as the society that, in essence, made a deal with the Devil for temporal knowledge and power. We are the society that is defined by infinity, the drive towards infinite power, speed, knowledge, etc.. But this can be thwarted if the culture is replaced by another, inferior culture, one that doesn't want to know or solve problems. That sort of counterculture, the rock-drugs-sex type of thing, the pessimism, dishonour, hedonism, irrationality, and nihilism, is prevalent today. We are dying because that culture has become dominant, not because we are, or were, Faustians.

[Fashus Maximus]

11 hours ago, Donnadogsoth said:

I mean God. Did God create the white race only to have it die—or even to have it be sacrificed on the altar of international brotherhood? What kind of God would do such a thing?

Well, I don't know that there is any evidence for God's intentions specifically for Japhethites. All I know is that the non-Jewish Israelites scoured across Europe and mixed with the Japhethites, which makes us - the offspring - God's chosen people.

11 hours ago, Donnadogsoth said:

Surely it's not a coincidence that both of the greatest philosophical influences on the Twentieth Century came from Imperial Britain?

Marx was Jewish and Adam Smith was Scottish. Regardless, the sources you provided claim that these 2 were created by their "lackeys" but then specify that they were either influenced by said lackey, or the lackey was influenced by them. E.g. Bentham influenced Marx, Smith influenced Lord Shelburne. Quite the stretch to say that they were created by oligarchs. I don't see what any of this has to do with British aristocrats manipulating Jews, as I see no evidence of that. If anything, your 2nd article completely disproves this claim; by 1900, most of the aristocracy was of Jewish lineage.

11 hours ago, Donnadogsoth said:

There are no wealthy Europeans?

Sure, but they are disproportionately represented in production, as opposed to being government monopolist middle-men for other producers. In production, the interactions is mostly or entirely voluntary, depending on how involved the government is. Clients get to refuse the purchase, they have a say on the price, etc.

With something like an insurance company, you don't get to choose whether or not you get car insurance. You either get it, or men with guns will come kidnap you for the government. You have little say on the price because you can't shop across states. You have even less say on the price because government licenses keep out competition. This is why I'm angered when I hear a Jew bragging about how their success is totally due to their verbal ability. They can brag all they want, but at the end of the day their refusal to engage us in the free market is an admission on their part that they are incapable of succeeding in a voluntary setting.

[Donnadogsoth]

1 hour ago, Fashus Maximus said:

Well, I don't know that there is any evidence for God's intentions specifically for Japhethites. All I know is that the non-Jewish Israelites scoured across Europe and mixed with the Japhethites, which makes us - the offspring - God's chosen people.

Marx was Jewish and Adam Smith was Scottish. Regardless, the sources you provided claim that these 2 were created by their "lackeys" but then specify that they were either influenced by said lackey, or the lackey was influenced by them. E.g. Bentham influenced Marx, Smith influenced Lord Shelburne. Quite the stretch to say that they were created by oligarchs. I don't see what any of this has to do with British aristocrats manipulating Jews, as I see no evidence of that. If anything, your 2nd article completely disproves this claim; by 1900, most of the aristocracy was of Jewish lineage.

Sure, but they are disproportionately represented in production, as opposed to being government monopolist middle-men for other producers. In production, the interactions is mostly or entirely voluntary, depending on how involved the government is. Clients get to refuse the purchase, they have a say on the price, etc.

With something like an insurance company, you don't get to choose whether or not you get car insurance. You either get it, or men with guns will come kidnap you for the government. You have little say on the price because you can't shop across states. You have even less say on the price because government licenses keep out competition. This is why I'm angered when I hear a Jew bragging about how their success is totally due to their verbal ability. They can brag all they want, but at the end of the day their refusal to engage us in the free market is an admission on their part that they are incapable of succeeding in a voluntary setting.

What rights and duties do God's chosen people have?  Must we sacrifice bulls to Jehovah?

Smith and Marx were encouraged and used by the British as part of their war on civilisation.  Smith's purpose was to destroy American sovereignty by preventing it from putting in place protectionist measures to allow it to transform from being merely a backwater resource pool to an industrial power.  Marx was deployed to destroy continental unity in Europe.  These ideologies got splashed around and came into conflict, but the essential was there:  damage the sovereign nation-state and especially destroy America as a world power and stop the unification of Europe as an economic entity, both of which were threatening the economic hegemony of Britain.

Do the Jews of Aristocratic lineage even think of themselves as Jews?  Do they think and act in any way resembling how "commoner" Jews think and act?

[Fashus Maximus]

2 hours ago, Donnadogsoth said:

What rights and duties do God's chosen people have?  Must we sacrifice bulls to Jehovah?

I don't believe in chosenness, nor does it sound that you believe that either. Whatever rights and duties our chosenness grants us is irrelevant. You said you were curious as to my thoughts on God's will with regards to the white race. I'm curious to know what is your argument in this line of questioning? That's actually why I'm entertaining answers to these questions you asked; what are you getting at exactly?

2 hours ago, Donnadogsoth said:

Smith and Marx were encouraged and used by the British as part of their war on civilisation.  [snip] These ideologies got splashed around and came into conflict, but the essential was there:  damage the sovereign nation-state and especially destroy America as a world power and stop the unification of Europe as an economic entity, both of which were threatening the economic hegemony of Britain.

I understand these claims, and I'm willing to accept them too. Just not seeing any evidence to support them.

For instance: 

- What British war on civilization?

- If the Brits wanted to stop unification of Europe, why is there an economic bloc known as the EU? Why is it set to become a sovereign militarized government by 2025 (according to Jewish EU politicians Shultz and Juncker)?

- Why is the use of Smith to promote globalism a British project, when Jews are the ones who benefit from a displaced white minority?

- Why is the use of Marx to promote communism a British project, when the Bolsheviks - until after WWII - were 85% Jewish?

EDIT: Also note, the founding of Israel was planned way ahead by Theodore Hertzel, and supported by Winston Churchill, both of them Jews. 

2 hours ago, Donnadogsoth said:

Do the Jews of Aristocratic lineage even think of themselves as Jews?  Do they think and act in any way resembling how "commoner" Jews think and act?

The Jewish Aristocracy absolutely see themselves as Jews. In an interview, when Lord Rothschild considers himself a British aristocrat, he said he considers himself Jewish. Also, now that there is Jewish admixture in the royal family, surprise surprise they are now accepting Meghan Markle - a Jew - as a suitable marriage partner.

They exhibit the exact same ethnocentrism as would a commoner Jew.

[Donnadogsoth]

3 hours ago, Fashus Maximus said:

 

I don't believe in chosenness, nor does it sound that you believe that either. Whatever rights and duties our chosenness grants us is irrelevant. You said you were curious as to my thoughts on God's will with regards to the white race. I'm curious to know what is your argument in this line of questioning? That's actually why I'm entertaining answers to these questions you asked; what are you getting at exactly?

Yet religion and race appear to conflict.  I am unwilling to sacrifice either for the sake of the other.  Can they not be reconciled?

I understand these claims, and I'm willing to accept them too. Just not seeing any evidence to support them.

For instance: 
- What British war on civilization?
- If the Brits wanted to stop unification of Europe, why is there an economic bloc known as the EU? Why is it set to become a sovereign militarized government by 2025 (according to Jewish EU politicians Shultz and Juncker)?
- Why is the use of Smith to promote globalism a British project, when Jews are the ones who benefit from a displaced white minority?
- Why is the use of Marx to promote communism a British project, when the Bolsheviks - until after WWII - were 85% Jewish?
EDIT: Also note, the founding of Israel was planned way ahead by Theodore Hertzel, and supported by Winston Churchill, both of them Jews.

The British attack on scientific fundamentals, on the nature of man, and on classical art, all subcontracted through scientists, philosophers, and artists.  Science has been reduced to mere empiricism and irrationalistic dogmas like statistical quantum probability and climate hysteria/ecologism (Prince Philip and the World Wildlife Fund), propaganda and popular entertainment and philosophy has reduced man to animal-like status, and art has been ripped free of its mooring of the good, the true, and the beautiful and so drifted into dark waters of weirdness, eros, whim, the interesting, and the ugly.  All this has to do with London and Wall Street money.

Is the EU functionally separate from the British empire, or is it like a weaker Siamese twin?--in other words, in what way does the EU go against the desires of the British empire?

The British imperialists don't care about displaced white minorities.

As you said, follow the money: Who financed Lenin and Trotsky?

[Fashus Maximus]

56 minutes ago, Donnadogsoth said:

Yet religion and race appear to conflict.  I am unwilling to sacrifice either for the sake of the other.  Can they not be reconciled?

What conflict are you referring to? Are you referring to the conflict of chosenness whilst being displaced?

56 minutes ago, Donnadogsoth said:

The British attack on scientific fundamentals, on the nature of man, and on classical art

I see. These attacks are present in every white western country, though. How can Brits be behind this attack if they are not the ethnic group common to all the countries this attack is occurring in?

56 minutes ago, Donnadogsoth said:

in what way does the EU go against the desires of the British empire?

In which timeline? Are you asking about the Jewish Britain of today? Or British Britain of old?

56 minutes ago, Donnadogsoth said:

The British imperialists don't care about displaced white minorities. As you said, follow the money: Who financed Lenin and Trotsky?

Truly British aristocrats do care. Case in point, a leading member of the Alt Right is of the Spencer family. He could have had a luxurious life, gotten a good career, and only cared of himself and his own offspring. Instead, he took on a tremendous burden to which the Alt Right owes its high rate of growth to.

Even here, the article you provide proves my point. Its chief example of "american" funding is Jew Jacob Schiff (and I was literally going to use him as evidence for my case). Here is a quote from Schiff himself:

"Six or eight weeks ago, the Jews [of the United States] would have heeded the call to arms as a duty but with heavy hearts, as they would have known they would be fighting to perpetuate Russian autocracy. But now all that has been changed. Russian democracy has become victorious, and thanks are due to the Jew that the Russian Revolution succeeded."

Based on the articles you've provided I see you're taking the claims of the articles, claiming white involvement, when in fact it is Jewish involvement. Have you considered that perhaps you've been duped by the old Jewish tactic of using whiteness as a sword while using Jewishness as a shield? Or perhaps, a Polish proverb to illustrate: "The Jew screams out in pain as he strikes you".

A more recent example: A man was recorded last year in Times Square holding a sign saying "Our fellow white people must take responsibility". The man recording was Eli Mosley who became CEO of Identity Evropa. In the video, he asks the man, "Are you sure you're white?". The man smiled and gave no answer, because it was blatantly obvious by his phenotypes and demeanor that he was Jewish. He was caught red-handed. Ever since, "our fellow white people" became a popular internet meme.

May I recommend you get the coincidence detector? That was the ultimate red-pill for me on this topic.

[Donnadogsoth]

 

Quote

What conflict are you referring to? Are you referring to the conflict of chosenness whilst being displaced?

No. I mean the anti-white nature of modern Christianity, that either ignores or actively promotes non-white colonisation of the West.

 

Quote

I see. These attacks are present in every white western country, though. How can Brits be behind this attack if they are not the ethnic group common to all the countries this attack is occurring in?

Quote

How can those ultimately responsible for 9/11 be behind the attack if they were not Saudi or Egyptian? They subcontract it, as to Hollywood and the education system. And sometimes, as in the case of Hitler, the things they cultivate get away from them with a mind of their own, but so far the “mind of their own” in Hollywood and the education system and financial and political worlds are still agitating in the same direction as the British imperialists would like.

 

Quote

In which timeline? Are you asking about the Jewish Britain of today? Or British Britain of old?

I'm asking about today, how does the EU go against the British imperial interest? Aren't all of these political factions essentially one at the top: the IMF, World Bank, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg Group. CFR, Wall Street, London, Davos, and probably etc—they're all linked together, so it's unreal to suggest that the EU is a fully independent body that can defy British interests. They're all in bed together. Are they all Jewish controlled?

 

Quote

Truly British aristocrats do care. Case in point, a leading member of the Alt Right is of the Spencer family. He could have had a luxurious life, gotten a good career, and only cared of himself and his own offspring. Instead, he took on a tremendous burden to which the Alt Right owes its high rate of growth to.

You're presuming the Alt Right is in direct opposition to British imperialism. Suppose it's not, and it's tolerated the way Hitler was tolerated (and even helped into power by London bankers), in order to set up a gang/countergang between Left and Right and so help destabilise society?

Also, if some British aristocrats care, then why are there only the few outliers who are doing something about it? Have Jewish-British oligarchs got a complete lock on power?

 

Quote

Even here, the article you provide proves my point. Its chief example of "american" funding is Jew Jacob Schiff (and I was literally going to use him as evidence for my case). Here is a quote from Schiff himself:

"Six or eight weeks ago, the Jews [of the United States] would have heeded the call to arms as a duty but with heavy hearts, as they would have known they would be fighting to perpetuate Russian autocracy. But now all that has been changed. Russian democracy has become victorious, and thanks are due to the Jew that the Russian Revolution succeeded."

Based on the articles you've provided I see you're taking the claims of the articles, claiming white involvement, when in fact it is Jewish involvement. Have you considered that perhaps you've been duped by the old Jewish tactic of using whiteness as a sword while using Jewishness as a shield? Or perhaps, a Polish proverb to illustrate: "The Jew screams out in pain as he strikes you".

I'm not prepared to believe the entire gentile oligarchy is helpless before the might of the Jews. You seem to be saying that is the case.

 

Quote

A more recent example: A man was recorded last year in Times Square holding a sign saying "Our fellow white people must take responsibility". The man recording was Eli Mosley who became CEO of Identity Evropa. In the video, he asks the man, "Are you sure you're white?". The man smiled and gave no answer, because it was blatantly obvious by his phenotypes and demeanor that he was Jewish. He was caught red-handed. Ever since, "our fellow white people" became a popular internet meme.

If the Jews as a race or quasi-race, a people if you will, are like this, are you arguing they are all like this, or that a few of their least scrupulous and most intelligent members are taking advantage of their immunity to criticism, their group solidarity, their invisibility, their group identity as victims, their wealth, and their organisational acumen, to promote an anti-Western agenda? Why are those members like this?

 

Quote

May I recommend you get the coincidence detector? That was the ultimate red-pill for me on this topic.

I appreciate that. My recommendation for you is the geometry detector. That the history of the West, one that in large part defines it, is between the republicanism of Solon versus the oligarchism of Babylon. That these two philosophies, which hold competing and mutually incompatible definitions of man, one of man as made in the image of God, the other of man as being as a beast of the field, to be controlled and bred and culled by master-beasts, intertwine through the centuries like snakes.

Here's a video, unfortunately with very low volume, which addresses the British Question.

A better presentation of the same material:

Lord Palmerston's Multicultural Zoo