The Postwar Consensus is why evil is tolerated

[lifepsyop]

Desire is not the problem. Life is not the problem. That is where many religious people, Christian or otherwise, go off the rails. It's called spiritual bypassing. The true spiritual life is about transfiguring and transforming our desires, not repressing them.

I would say that is partly right, we are to transform into a new man with a heart for God, and yet the Christian life is also full of restraint and resisting of the temptations of the Devil.

Liberalism never mandates that people do that. That's the result of personal freedom divorced from ethical responsibility. But liberalism isn't inherently opposed to ethics, even religious ones.

Liberalism makes all things optional. The individual can be ethical or immoral, and there is a marketplace opened up for the consumer of any particular lifestyle.

This system, of course, will gradually tend towards immorality, which is what happened in our actual history.

The early generations of the liberal order were themselves still products of Christendom and a Christian order of living... and so most people individually chose virtue, even under a liberal system. But every subsequent generation under Liberalism shed more and more of that Christian order.

It simply won't carry water for authoritarian religious impulses. Nor should it.

Do you think the apostle Paul struggled with authoritarian impulses?

Like when he instructed that women should be submissive to men and that homosexuality was an abomination that would bring the wrath of God?

 

[bèlla]

I agree with you, but I notice you avoided my question.

If some people consider the preservation of strong families/communities to also coincide with some aspect of racial/ethnic preservation, I am assuming you have no issue with that?

I didn’t avoid your question and answered it honestly. You can dwell on the problem or focus on the solution instead. You appear to need agreement regarding preservation without acknowledging the unlikeliness of its occurrence. You want to place the blame on the government for the narrative. But that’s not the crux of what ails the group you’re championing.

It is impossible to preserve a culture that’s eroding itself from within. Read that twice. They are the source of their problem and until they’re willing to accept responsibility and restore order where it’s lacking they’ll continue to wither. This isn’t the fifties and they aren’t those people anymore and that’s the truth they‘re unwilling to accept.

Nostalgia won’t make you great nor will a slogan. You have to rebuild.

I think people like to say "why do you care so much about it?", and then when you scratch the surface you find out they themselves are quite obsessed with a singular view on the subject of race and they are uncomfortable with any deviation.

I give little attention to the subject and view its obsession as a symptom of littleness. When you believe your options are limited and have little hope of improvement you focus on things like that. People who are able to ascend or in a position to do so place their attention elsewhere. Race matters when the pie is shrinking.

That's true, but our foundation is not sure. Look at the state of our communities, virtually everywhere. The church checked out of trying to maintain a good and virtuous society a long time ago.

Society’s foundation isn’t one in the same as its citizens. The world can collapse around you and you can thrive in the midst of its upending. Everyone isn’t panicking or pulling out their hair. Nor did we place our trust in the institutions and ideologies others did. That’s the difference between a strong foundation and one built on empty promises and propaganda.

But wanting to preserve one's ethnic group, and have the freedom to live around and associate with one's own ethnic group as Christians of all types have done for millenia, surely you wouldn't call that anti-christ would you?

Everyone doesn’t feel the loss of the freedoms you speak of nor are they concerned about their erosion. Life has continued for them as it always has. There’s a demographic within the group who shares your concerns but the ones who don’t have favorable circumstances and aren’t afraid of losing their position.

Try rallying your church to organize politically to improve the health of your community. You'll find the church leadership is very quick to prevent this.

Why would a church need to rally politically to do so? Wouldn’t it compromise their non profit status? And why would you assume a political response would solve what ails when we’ve continually worsened?

Well, some Asians, such as Japanese, also have a very strong degree of ethnic cohesion.

So can I assume you would be okay with a European ethnicity doing the same thing?

I have no problems with Asian culture or how they conduct themselves. But we’re speaking of America and you don’t possess the tools they have nor their influence. Your women have a different makeup from theirs and they’re more rebellious. Which is why we have incels, the manosphere, men going their own way and many afraid to marry because of the financial fallout they experience.

Now remind me again. Whose fault is that?

~bella

 

[FireDragon76]

I would say that is partly right, we are to transform into a new man with a heart for God, and yet the Christian life is also full of restraint and resisting of the temptations of the Devil.

Is your religion more about resisting the perceived assaults of the devil, or following in the way of Jesus?

Liberalism makes all things optional. The individual can be ethical or immoral, and there is a marketplace opened up for the consumer of any particular lifestyle.

Human freedom is the only way love can be meaningful. External coercion is not love. In terms of civil law, reason is the only just standard for the use of coercion. Otherwise, you're just needlessly, or maliciously, scandalizing the Gospel.

 

[lifepsyop]

I didn’t avoid your question and answered it honestly. You can dwell on the problem or focus on the solution instead. You appear to need agreement regarding preservation without acknowledging the unlikeliness of its occurrence. You want to place the blame on the government for the narrative. But that’s not the crux of what ails the group you’re championing.

I haven't gauged the likeliness of anything, or placed blame on the government for anything in particular.

My purpose is investigating a 20th century religion that seems to have imposed itself onto Christianity.

If someone cannot bring themselves to openly state "it's okay for European people to preserve themselves as an ethnic group" then I believe they are under the influence of this new religion.

It is impossible to preserve a culture that’s eroding itself from within. Read that twice. They are the source of their problem and until they’re willing to accept responsibility and restore order where it’s lacking they’ll continue to wither. This isn’t the fifties and they aren’t those people anymore and that’s the truth they‘re unwilling to accept.

Nostalgia won’t make you great nor will a slogan. You have to rebuild.

All true.

I give little attention to the subject and view its obsession as a symptom of littleness. When you believe your options are limited and have little hope of improvement you focus on things like that. People who are able to ascend or in a position to do so place their attention elsewhere. Race matters when the pie is shrinking.

That's true, and perhaps we should be concerned about the poorer classes of people that have to "share more of the pie", and thus are subjected to more racial/ethnic conflict and strife.

It's easy to have an "above it all" attitude when you're living out in the big countryside or a gated community.

Society’s foundation isn’t one in the same as its citizens. The world can collapse around you and you can thrive in the midst of its upending. Everyone isn’t panicking or pulling out their hair. Nor did we place our trust in the institutions and ideologies others did. That’s the difference between a strong foundation and one built on empty promises and propaganda.

I think we are supposed to be promoting and building virtuous communities and institutions, not sitting isolated and uncaring if the society around us crumbles.

Are you premillenial by any chance?

Everyone doesn’t feel the loss of the freedoms you speak of nor are they concerned about their erosion. Life has continued for them as it always has. There’s a demographic within the group who shares your concerns but the ones who don’t have favorable circumstances and aren’t afraid of losing their position.

The "favorable circumstances" you seem to be referring to are not having to live with the consequences of ethnic diversity. Of course they aren't concerned about something that generally doesn't affect them.

The concerned demographic you refer to are people who've had to live with diversity, or are noticing its trends and are concerned that their children/grandchildren will have to deal with it.

Why would a church need to rally politically to do so?

Churches did organize politically, for over a thousand years up until the latter 20th century.

Were they all mistaken?

or have we arrived at the post-WW2 liberal democracy "end of history" where churches don't need to worry about that stuff anymore?

I have no problems with Asian culture or how they conduct themselves. But we’re speaking of America and you don’t possess the tools they have nor their influence.

Are Americans that descend from Christian Europe not allowed to preserve their ethnic identity?

You claimed you are not concerned with things like that. Let them do what they want, right?

Your women have a different makeup from theirs and they’re more rebellious. Which is why we have incels, the manosphere, men going their own way and many afraid to marry because of the financial fallout they experience.

Now remind me again. Whose fault is that?

Yea, feminism is a huge problem. Even many "Conservative Christians" are basically supporters of 2nd-wave feminism.

This is also related to the Postwar Consensus, as it was decided that any man who invokes his power is acting a little bit too much like an authoritarian fascist / nazi.

Part of the victorious Liberal order was to shatter the relationship between men and women and render them into atomized individuals.

 

[bèlla]

My purpose is investigating a 20th century religion that seems to have imposed itself onto Christianity.

Why do you expect them to bend to christian teachings? The bible said the world would oppose us. We shouldn’t be surprised when it happens.

If someone cannot bring themselves to openly state "it's okay for European people to preserve themselves as an ethnic group" then I believe they are under the influence of this new religion.

Why do you need their validation to act? If that’s the course you have in mind get on with it. You don’t need their agreement and it’s not about them anyway. They don’t have to support you.

That's true, and perhaps we should be concerned about the poorer classes of people that have to "share more of the pie", and thus are subjected to more racial/ethnic conflict and strife.

It's easy to have an "above it all" attitude when you're living out in the big countryside or a gated community.

When you play with wolves bad things follow. If the bible was the benchmark you would have never trusted them and seen through the mask a long time ago. Now they’ve accomplished their mission and have you in want and you’re complaining. The majority weren’t concerned with the poor when their circumstances were better. Now that the middle class is struggling you’re sounding the alarm. There’s nothing new under the sun and it’s been underway but you didn’t see it and now you do.

That’s the thing about oppression. Most people keep their mouths shut until it happens to them.

I think we are supposed to be promoting and building virtuous communities and institutions, not sitting isolated and uncaring if the society around us crumbles.

Are you premillenial by any chance?

Everyone wasn’t being idle while others were worshiping politicians and being deceived. And no, I’m not premillennial.

The "favorable circumstances" you seem to be referring to are not having to live with the consequences of ethnic diversity. Of course they aren't concerned about something that generally doesn't affect them.

The concerned demographic you refer to are people who've had to live with diversity, or are noticing its trends and are concerned that their children/grandchildren will have to deal with it.

That’s what happens when you put the wealthy in positions of authority and pretend they’re like you. You’ll make a fool of yourself. But now you’re stuck and have to play the hand you’re dealt which was always the plan. So how will you respond? This is only the beginning. They won’t stop until you’re broken.

Churches did organize politically, for over a thousand years up until the latter 20th century.

Were they all mistaken?

Once again, you can’t make people support a cause they don’t want to get involved in. You don’t have their support for a reason.

or have we arrived at the post-WW2 liberal democracy "end of history" where churches don't need to worry about that stuff anymore?

It isn’t worth the risk. Politically or financially. The payoff isn’t worth the loss.

Are Americans that descend from Christian Europe not allowed to preserve their ethnic identity?

You claimed you are not concerned with things like that. Let them do what they want, right?

What does the constitution say? Are you granted that right by law? If so, what’s the problem?

I don’t concern myself with the issue for several reasons. The solution isn’t complicated in itself. But you have a lot to tackle before it can be implemented.

Yea, feminism is a huge problem. Even many "Conservative Christians" are basically supporters of 2nd-wave feminism.

This is also related to the Postwar Consensus, as it was decided that any man who invokes his power is acting a little bit too much like an authoritarian fascist / nazi.

Part of the victorious Liberal order was to shatter the relationship between men and women and render them into atomized individuals.

I find most of it distasteful and utterly unbiblical. There were issues that required address but it’s gone too far. This is what I mean when I referenced laying a foundation. You can’t allow your household to run amok and order must be restored. I don’t believe the majority are capable of bringing them to heel that‘s why you’re doomed to fail.

You can’t raise a group when people don’t know their place. You have to work together and that requires a willingness to follow orders. Everyone can’t be in charge. And you won‘t defeat Jezebel without putting your foot on her neck. It sounds harsh but it‘s true. You’ll have to be firm and it may require strong-arming too. That’s the only way you’ll save your people. If you don’t get this under control you’ll have a matriarchy and it’s heading in that direction.

The solution begins with her. Then you can address the home and your children and reinforce your culture. I know what I’m talking about because I’ve done it with my daughter. She’s a chaste woman of God who desires marriage and a large family who works from home and wants to homeschool. She knows her place, how to follow and her duty. And she’s a millennial.

~bella

 

[lifepsyop]

Why do you expect them to bend to christian teachings? The bible said the world would oppose us. We shouldn’t be surprised when it happens.

I should have clarified, this new religion is what the Christian church itself seems to follow, or at least is syncretized with.

The church seems to join in publicly enforcing the morality of the Postwar Consensus, (e.g. punishing and exiling suspected "racists", in the same way they might have done towards traditionally degenerate behavior in the past)

When you play with wolves bad things follow. If the bible was the benchmark you would have never trusted them and seen through the mask a long time ago. Now they’ve accomplished their mission and have you in want and you’re complaining.

I'm not in want, and personally I am relatively far removed from these problems. But I see what will be coming for my children down the road.

It's not like we have to guess, just take a look at Europe.

And honestly the things I see happening just make me angry at the cowardice of our generation. I think most would gladly sacrifice their own children before they would risk being labeled as a racist.

The majority weren’t concerned with the poor when their circumstances were better. Now that the middle class is struggling you’re sounding the alarm. There’s nothing new under the sun and it’s been underway but you didn’t see it and now you do.

That’s the thing about oppression. Most people keep their mouths shut until it happens to them.

Ethnic strife affects poor/working-class people more than anyone else. Everyone with the means to do so, moves away from it.

Once again, you can’t make people support a cause they don’t want to get involved in. You don’t have their support for a reason.

It isn’t worth the risk. Politically or financially. The payoff isn’t worth the loss.

I'm talking about relatively mundane issues. Like churches organizing politically to have pornography banned in their state. But they can't even manage to do simple stuff like that. The pastors are all "above politics" ... We are all just atomized individuals in the sea of liberal democracy.

What does the constitution say? Are you granted that right by law? If so, what’s the problem?

Well, the constitution seems to imply that we have freedom of association.

However the post-1960's Civil Rights regime says otherwise.

I find most of it distasteful and utterly unbiblical. There were issues that required address but it’s gone too far. This is what I mean when I referenced laying a foundation. You can’t allow your household to run amok and order must be restored. I don’t believe the majority are capable of bringing them to heel that‘s why you’re doomed to fail.

You can’t raise a group when people don’t know their place. You have to work together and that requires a willingness to follow orders. Everyone can’t be in charge. And you won‘t defeat Jezebel without putting your foot on her neck. It sounds harsh but it‘s true. You’ll have to be firm and it may require strong-arming too. That’s the only way you’ll save your people. If you don’t get this under control you’ll have a matriarchy and it’s heading in that direction.

The solution begins with her. Then you can address the home and your children and reinforce your culture. I know what I’m talking about because I’ve done it with my daughter. She’s a chaste woman of God who desires marriage and a large family who works from home and wants to homeschool. She knows her place, how to follow and her duty. And she’s a millennial.

~bella

That's all very true. And I think screaming about evil racist white people has been a way for American women to rebel against their fathers (or the traditional Christian-European patriarchal order that they descended from). 20th century Feminism and Anti-Racism / Anti-Fascism have been closely intertwined under "Liberation Theology", with the white man cast as the chief villain. That ideology has underpinned the Postwar Consensus... sadly, supported by a great deal of even 'conservative Christian' demographic.

Most pastors live in fear of their wives.

 

[bèlla]

The church seems to join in publicly enforcing the morality of the Postwar Consensus, (e.g. punishing and exiling suspected "racists", in the same way they might have done towards traditionally degenerate behavior in the past)

When you want someone to roll the dice you have to make it worth their while. That‘s why I said it wasn’t worth the financial risks for them. They’re not sticking their neck out on your behalf. If you want to gather amongst yourselves that’s fine. But they won’t get involved. That’s the 501c3 effect.

I'm not in want, and personally I am relatively far removed from these problems. But I see what will be coming for my children down the road.

It's not like we have to guess, just take a look at Europe.

They can have a different ending if you prepare them well. But you have to be intentional.

And honestly the things I see happening just make me angry at the cowardice of our generation. I think most would gladly sacrifice their own children before they would risk being labeled as a racist.

I don’t think that’s true. They’re not willing to die on that sword because other things are more important. As we’ve acknowledged, this is a non issue once you reach a certain echelon. You’ll be in the company of others like yourself and the rhetoric you hear elsewhere isn’t present in those circles. The majority are more concerned with financial mobility than racial politics.

I'm talking about relatively mundane issues. Like churches organizing politically to have pornography banned in their state. But they can't even manage to do simple stuff like that. The pastors are all "above politics" ... We are all just atomized individuals in the sea of liberal democracy.

I’d liken it to those self-service checkouts. They’ve convinced customers to do the work without lowering prices while reducing staff and we accept it. In the same way, the church has pulled back in many areas and shifted the responsibility to the flock while collecting their tithes. But I’ve always viewed them as businesses and it doesn’t surprise me.

That's all very true. And I think screaming about evil racist white people has been a way for American women to rebel against their fathers (or the traditional Christian-European patriarchal order that they descended from). 20th century Feminism and Anti-Racism / Anti-Fascism have been closely intertwined under "Liberation Theology", with the white man cast as the chief villain. That ideology has underpinned the Postwar Consensus... sadly, supported by a great deal of even 'conservative Christian' demographic.

Most pastors live in fear of their wives.

I think a lot of them have genuine issues with men and don’t like them very much. The venom goes well beyond circumstance that’s why I mentioned Jezebel. It’s a spiritual condition that plays into a narrative for greater integration. I’ve noticed patterns in commercials and films along those lines. Many are dating interracially in greater numbers. But there are groups like the pronatalists who want to do the things you’ve discussed. You attract all types in those circles but that may be a possible step worth considering.

~bella

 

[lifepsyop]

When you want someone to roll the dice you have to make it worth their while. That‘s why I said it wasn’t worth the financial risks for them. They’re not sticking their neck out on your behalf. If you want to gather amongst yourselves that’s fine. But they won’t get involved. That’s the 501c3 effect.

Yep... can't lose that 501c3.
Though on the other hand, since churches fear risk and going against prevailing cultural winds, they will also have to adapt to whatever replaces the Postwar Consensus, as it is currently in a state of collapse.

I don’t think that’s true. They’re not willing to die on that sword because other things are more important. As we’ve acknowledged, this is a non issue once you reach a certain echelon. You’ll be in the company of others like yourself and the rhetoric you hear elsewhere isn’t present in those circles. The majority are more concerned with financial mobility than racial politics.

The last thing anyone wants to deal with is racial politics, as they will be tiptoeing around actual blasphemy laws with severe consequences.

However a lot of that mindset is dying with the boomer generation, especially as younger people become more and more aware that there will be no place to run to if the issue is not confronted honestly.

I’d liken it to those self-service checkouts. They’ve convinced customers to do the work without lowering prices while reducing staff and we accept it. In the same way, the church has pulled back in many areas and shifted the responsibility to the flock while collecting their tithes. But I’ve always viewed them as businesses and it doesn’t surprise me.

Yea, the churches seem to have dug themselves into a nice safe space of just focusing on "the individual", while completely surrendering all duty they had to the community.

As church leaders like to say, all politics is only affected by "changing individual hearts and minds"... is their way of absolving themselves of all risky responsibility and masking a cowardly retreat from the public sphere where the church once contended.

Then you have the "global mission trips" to everywhere in the world but their own neighborhoods.

I think a lot of them have genuine issues with men and don’t like them very much. The venom goes well beyond circumstance that’s why I mentioned Jezebel. It’s a spiritual condition that plays into a narrative for greater integration. I’ve noticed patterns in commercials and films along those lines. Many are dating interracially in greater numbers. But there are groups like the pronatalists who want to do the things you’ve discussed. You attract all types in those circles but that may be a possible step worth considering.

~bella

Women-ruled societies are approaching total collapse all over the world... This is probably one reason the Postwar Consensus is also collapsing...

...things have gotten so obviously bad that the lies and illusions have become unsustainable. It's becoming increasingly clear that strong men need to stand up and fix things, in particular strong white men that still have memory of the Christian-European tradition they came from that created our civilization in the first place.

 

[Yarddog]

I've been trying to distill the reigning postwar ideology down into simple explanations:


We have an alternative code of morality that has been allowed to flourish for the last 60+ years.

The only truly unpardonable sin of this new moral system is "racism". As long as you're not being "racist", then you're basically okay and will be tolerated.

The only true form of blasphemy is to use a particular racial slur. No other forms of blasphemy exist. You can say practically anything else. All sense of "true evil" has been loaded into this one particular part of speech.

For example:
Why is pornography mass produced and saturated throughout society?

Because pornographers aren't racists. A lot of us don't like pornography, but we accept it as part of a society that values peoples' freedom to do what they want.

Before the Postwar Consensus, pornography was recognized as an extreme source of immorality and was simply not openly tolerated in society.

For another example:
Why is violent crime allowed to run unchecked throughout our cities? Because a severe crackdown on violent crime would be racist.

Before the Postwar Consensus, the kind of violent crime we see happening daily would have been met with immediate and harsh retribution.

Crime is still bad, and frowned upon, but it is generally tolerated as a part of living in a pluralistic society. However, a racial "hate-crime" (i.e. white on black violence), would not be tolerated for a moment. All the institutional gears of society would immediately begin turning to bring the harshest punishment upon the perpetrator.


The explanation for this is that our moral 'lexicon' of good and evil has been uprooted from a more traditional, Biblical landscape, and replaced with the Postwar Consensus that came into being in 1945, was ascendant in the 1960's, but really became solidified as Totalitarian ideology in the 1990s.


Regarding Christianity.... known practicing homosexuals could sit comfortably in most churches in America. Tolerance would be preached. "Jesus ate with sinners"...

However, try having a known "racist" come into your church and you will suddenly find yourself in a church reminiscent of the middle ages, with the church leadership ready to immediately cast out and excommunicate the evildoer and blaspheming racist.


So, all manner of traditional concepts of evil are allowed to flourish openly because our senses for seeing and responding evil have been compressed into this one small area we call 'racism'.

Does anyone doubt this or question it? Please discuss.

Thanks for reading.



Also, there was an excellent video made related to this topic, by Jonathan Pageau at Symbolic World.

"Th World War 2 Consensus is Breaking Down"

Mostly nonsense.
Racism is still alive and well, in the US. It exists in every area in some form.
Racists sit in churches just a LGBTQ people are.

 

[lifepsyop]

Mostly nonsense.
Racism is still alive and well, in the US. It exists in every area in some form.

Not a counter-argument to my post.

That it exists does not change the fact that it is still treated with the severity of religious blasphemy.

Racists sit in churches just a LGBTQ people are.

LGBTQ flags fly freely around churches and church communities. Nobody really cares. Just part of the fallen world.

"Racist" flags or public expressions would not be tolerated, because they are regarded as pure evil. Even if an individual doesn't believe they are evil, they still feel the fear of being associated with blasphemy code violations.

 

[Yarddog]

Not a counter-argument to my post.

That it exists does not change the fact that it is still treated with the severity of religious blasphemy.

Who really treats religious blasphemy seriously anymore. We have a President that makes a habit of it. Half the country doesn't care.

LGBTQ flags fly freely around churches and church communities. Nobody really cares. Just part of the fallen world.

I haven't seen a single one flying around anywhere.

"Racist" flags or public expressions would not be tolerated, because they are regarded as pure evil.

They are flags of evil, regardless of which race flies them.

 

[lifepsyop]

Who really treats religious blasphemy seriously anymore. We have a President that makes a habit of it. Half the country doesn't care.

Yea, thankfully the Postwar religion is breaking down among people, especially in the last few years.

I haven't seen a single one flying around anywhere.

Are you really claiming that Pride flags aren't a common display in towns, cities, and stores?

Who do you think is going to believe you?

They are flags of evil, regardless of which race flies them.

Is it evil for black people to recognize ethnic identity/solidarity with each other?

Is it evil for white people to recognize ethnic identity/solidarity with each other?

 

[bèlla]

Yep... can't lose that 501c3.
Though on the other hand, since churches fear risk and going against prevailing cultural winds, they will also have to adapt to whatever replaces the Postwar Consensus, as it is currently in a state of collapse.

Sometimes a structure is damaged beyond repair and the only way forward is reconstruction. That’s where we are with the church and you’re not going to fix it. You’ll have to abandon the old and build anew with likeminded people. Your concern can be a reason for doing so. It’s a common concern others have that I wouldn’t limit to ethnicity. I’d emphasize a wholesome culture founded on biblical principles and the other will happen in turn.

Yea, the churches seem to have dug themselves into a nice safe space of just focusing on "the individual", while completely surrendering all duty they had to the community.

As church leaders like to say, all politics is only affected by "changing individual hearts and minds"... is their way of absolving themselves of all risky responsibility and masking a cowardly retreat from the public sphere where the church once contended.

Then you have the "global mission trips" to everywhere in the world but their own neighborhoods.

You eat the elephant one piece at a time and there’s many roads to the goal. If you start with a common pain point you’ll have more buy-in than a controversial subject. That’s why I suggested culture over race and politics. You’re limiting yourself to europeans when there’s significantly more people who are sick of our society than not. They’ll welcome an alternative.

...things have gotten so obviously bad that the lies and illusions have become unsustainable. It's becoming increasingly clear that strong men need to stand up and fix things, in particular strong white men that still have memory of the Christian-European tradition they came from that created our civilization in the first place.

Anger usually proceeds action and that‘s where you are at the moment. The time of bearing your grievances in silence is at an end and men are speaking out. Once that’s underway you‘ll develop extremes until your heels have cooled and you’re ready for the hard stuff. You’re reacting to the past and current through your decisions regarding the opposite sex. You’ve built the manosphere and decided to go your own way or look for love overseas and date outside of your race.

But that doesn’t address the problem in its entirety and you’re beginning to see that. Ostracizing has merit and it will take a few generations to destroy the seeds that contributed to their mindset. They’ll never see the truth if you’re in their presence. She has no incentive to change if you marry her. You must demonstrate your seriousness by doing otherwise. Make her walk it out. If she wants liberty and independence let her have it. Take your hands off completely and let it play out.

This doesn’t resign you to singleness of course. Take a card from Xerxes and send Vashti packing and put a more suitable woman in her place. That’s how you bring her to heel. Arguments and threats are useless. She must see and experience the consequences of her insubordination. And you shouldn’t be breeding with women who consider you their enemy. If you do it en masse she’ll get the message.

Her advantage over you is your desire. As long as she believes she’s a certainty she’ll never change. But if you leave her to her devices and choose other women you’ll force her hand. And create a meme once you do and call it #TheWhiteManEffect. Take a picture and post it on social media and watch it go viral. ;-)

You have to see your arm as a place of honor and don’t put unruly women on it. Just because she’s white doesn’t mean she’s earned that position. That’s your problem. You can’t allow attraction to breed disrespect.

~bella

 

[Yarddog]

Are you really claiming that Pride flags aren't a common display in towns, cities, and stores?

No, I'm saying that I haven't seen a single one flying around where I've been.

Who do you think is going to believe you?

I don't care what people believe. Just being honest.

Is it evil for black people to recognize ethnic identity/solidarity with each other?

Is that racism? It isn't evil unless they are sinning.

Is it evil for white people to recognize ethnic identity/solidarity with each other?

Is there any difference?

 

[lifepsyop]

No, I'm saying that I haven't seen a single one flying around where I've been.

I don't care what people believe. Just being honest.

So you understand that you're a rare exception and most people see pride flags everywhere, because they are everywhere.

It would have been more honest of you to just let my factual statement stand instead of implying it was wrong with your "I don't see any" response.

Is that racism? It isn't evil unless they are sinning.

Is there any difference?

No there isn't any difference is there? It's good to know that you are okay with European-descended people preserving themselves as an ethnic group.

 

[Yarddog]

So you understand that you're a rare exception and most people see pride flags everywhere, because they are everywhere.

Well, not the people in Kentucky.

It would have been more honest of you to just let my factual statement stand instead of implying it was wrong with your "I don't see any" response.

I didn't imply anything. You took it that way. I was just saying that it doesn't happen around here

Lifepsyop:

No there isn't any difference is there? It's good to know that you are okay with European-descended people preserving themselves as an ethnic group.
-----------------
I have problem with it as long as they allow others to do the same or intermingle.

 

[lifepsyop]

Lifepsyop:

No there isn't any difference is there? It's good to know that you are okay with European-descended people preserving themselves as an ethnic group.
-----------------
I have problem with it as long as they allow others to do the same or intermingle.

Voluntarily intermingle? or would you prefer they be forced to intermingle?

it would be pretty weird for you to say an ethnic group should be allowed to preserve themselves while also not believing they should have the freedom to associate with each other in the way they choose...

I'm assuming you are a devoted disciple of the Civil Rights regime, and you enthusiastically support the use of national guard with drawn bayonets marching on any white people attempting to hold onto their own neighborhoods or any other physical spaces... because those spaces would be "evil" right?

 

[Yarddog]

Voluntarily intermingle? or would you prefer they be forced to intermingle?

Forced intermingle? Where is that occurring?

it would be pretty weird for you to say an ethnic group should be allowed to preserve themselves while also not believing they should have the freedom to associate with each other in the way they choose...

That would be weird if I had said anything like that.

I'm assuming you are a devoted disciple of the Civil Rights regime, and you enthusiastically support the use of national guard with drawn bayonets marching on any white people attempting to hold onto their own neighborhoods or any other physical spaces... because those spaces would be "evil" right?

You seem to be weird. You know what they say when you assume. Where do you get these weird ideas?

 

[lifepsyop]

Forced intermingle? Where is that occurring?

It's a simple question, isn't it?

Do you believe different ethnicities should be forced to intermingle with / live next to each other?

Should black people be allowed to have black areas?

Should white people be allowed to have white areas?

That would be weird if I had said anything like that.

You said ethnicities should be allowed to preserve themselves, yet you won't specify whether or not they should be forced to intermingle.

You seem to be weird. You know what they say when you assume. Where do you get these weird ideas?

So... no response again.

It's okay if you don't want to have a discussion, nobody is forcing you to be here.

 

[Yarddog]

It's a simple question, isn't it?

My question was simple, too. Where is that occurring?

Do you believe different ethnicities should be forced to intermingle with / live next to each other?

I believe that people should be allowed to live where they choose. I believe that people should not be "forced" to live in area that don't want to live.

Should black people be allowed to have black areas?

Not by law or by force.

Should white people be allowed to have white areas?

Not by law or by force.

You said ethnicities should be allowed to preserve themselves, yet you won't specify whether or not they should be forced to intermingle.

I have been quite clear, yet, you fail to comprehend what I've written.

So... no response again.

I'm sorry that you don't read well.

It's okay if you don't want to have a discussion, nobody is forcing you to be here.

I'm willing to answer any questions you ask and I have. All you have to do is read without prejudice. Why don't you come and actually say what you want to truly say but are too scared to admit.