This sort of comment is why no one can take you seriously.
âŚyikes.
You do realize there are better ways to flirt than that, right r4e?
1 Like
Didnât you just spend the last few days bashing evil whitey Christians!!!, and now youâre in this thread defending it???
Please make it make sense, Scalptor.
1 Like
How am I defending âitâ.?? And whatever âitâ is ; it is not âevil whitey Xiansâ, WEFT that is supposed to be.
This is suppose to be philosophy - not a gang fight.
If I see a stupid comment - I call it out.
Very inconsistently I see⌠got it. Continue on then.
Nope.
Iâm calling you out too.
Why not use your brain , and try to answer my questions??
"How am I defending âitâ.?? And whatever âitâ is ; it is not âevil whitey Xiansâ, WEFT that is supposed to be.
This is suppose to be philosophy - not a gang fight.
If I see a stupid comment - I call it out."
Go ahead.
Abrahamism eliminates ethnicity as a disruptive aspect of human nature.
Abrahamism abstracts masculinity. God is the only alphaâŚthe only cock.
All biological males are stripped of their ethnicity and their masculinity, becoming representation of godâs penis on earth.
His wife is really godâs mate.
His children are really godâs offspring./
He is a mere proxy of godâs willâŚhe has no will of his own.
God has been replaced with the idea of absolute order.
Schopenhauer eliminated the âgodâ part and left Will as his purified abstractionâŚwhich Nietzsche adopted.
He located will in some external realmâŚwhich is nonsensical because spatial locations and before and after temporal concepts, can only refer to what exists.
What is not IN existence is, by definition, non-existent.
So, Schopenhauerâs Will, the concept that is outside causality, a groundless grounding, an unfounded foundation, is non-existent. A mere projectionâŚa cop-out trying to explain what remains incomprehensible.
Existence can only be explained from wihtin what exists.
Anyone beginning with the metaphysical is a con-manâŚa narcissist pretending he has occult knowledge, using words to impress and convince the gullible that this is so - exploiting the human need for certaintyâŚfor a complete and final understanding.
The incomprehensible is terrifying and satisfyingly to organisms that need to order everything, in accordance with their needs and desires..
1 Like
Traditional families constitute a challenge to social cohesion among racially and culturally heterogenous populations. The father had to be taken out of the picture, because men pass on their own values and ideals to their children, and are more resistant to collectivizing indoctrinations, particularly towards what contradicts their own values and ideals. With no masculine alternative children and women could be easily assimilated and integrated.
In modern/postmodern multicultural, multiethnic, multiracial unities, practicing miscegenation as a means of harmonizing disparate populations, constructing uniformity, e.g., America, the institution of family is being converted into emotionally founded unities of convenience and support groups propagating systemic ideals and values.
Heterogenous systems must promote any ideology that decrease the relevance of bio-diversities, replacing them with products and services, made available to those who remain loyal and useful. All divisive concepts, such as biological based identifiers, are to be reduced to illusions, or fashions. New age families must be nurturing cubicles, raising children to deny any identifier that inhibits the harmonious coexistence of disparate peoples; anything that lowers their sense of self to a lowest-common-denominator, or, even, completely rejects it, is promoted so that the child can be socially engineered using systemic ideals and identifiers; given a social character it will be expected to preform for the rest of its life.
Modern families become a part of modern/postmodern social-engineering, training âideal citizensâ for their âideal environments.â
1 Like
âThe Maurivadian is, according to Poulet, a paste-less futureless man, born anew at every instant. The instants are points which organize themselves into a line, but what is important is the instinct, not the line. The Maurivadian being has in a sense no history. Nothing follows from what has gone before. He is constantly surprised.
He cannot predict his own reaction to events. He is constantly being overtaken by events. A condition of breathlessness surrounds him.â
âBarthelme, Donald
And so, they deny free-willâŚ
John Lock finds a new foothold in generations obsessed with escaping determination, but instead of freedom they find a gaping void that they must strive to fill with materialism and hedonism.
His tabula rasa concept is not descriptive but prescriptive, a form of brainwashing: cleanse the mind of all that binds it to its past, to the continuum of its existence, preparing the emergence of a psychological puppet, awaiting reprogramming and new directives.
Men with âno historyâ are automatons that can be directed through extraordinary promises. Living in the perpetual moment, like simpler creatures, unable to use precedent to perceive patterns, is the literal meaning of âbrainwashing.â
A Maurivadian is âfuturelessâ because the future remains forever in the imminent future â to-morrow, that never is to-day. With no past to anchor him, and no future to call his own, he is contained in a perpetual present, swept away by any new contrivance, any novel distraction, that helps him cope with what is absent.
1 Like
A challenge of Christian faith on traditionally Aryan families is partially concealed in allegorical narrativesâŚ
âAnyone who loves his father and mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.â
[Mathew 10:37:]
âBible
âPeter said to him, âWe have left everything to follow you! âI tell you the truth,â Jesus replied, âno one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel will fail to receive a hundred times as much.ââ
[Mark 10:28-30:]
âBible
The Gospel being the words carrying forth an all-consuming ideal.
The means through which scripture became the modern nihilistic centrepiece, currently called âright-wingâ religious fundamentalism, can only be attributed to the power of marketing and the seductive force of these negating doctrines, with their spectacular inversions and self-contradictions. Scriptural family values promote a god-centered family, within which biological males only serve as godâs earthly representatives, proxies of a divine penis entrusted with a flock of concubines and their handlers.
Within Aryan traditional families, males were the representatives of shared bloodlines (genes) and shared traditions (memes). The father being the prime connector to tribal identity â a part of the whole, i.e., ĎΟοΚοΚ (homoioi) = same, similar.
Nihilistic spirituality, such as Abrahamism, abstracts the whole into an intangible idea, it names âgodâ â gradually becoming institutionalized; bloodless, faceless, concepts that can integrate diverse multiplicities into an ideological singularity.
âFamilies of this type arise in America not just in response to a particular memberâs pathology but as a normal response to prevailing social conditions. As the world of business, jobs, and politics becomes more and more menacing, the family tries to create for itself an island of security in the surrounding disorder. It deals with internal tensions by denying their existence, desperately clinging to an illusion of normality. Yet the picture of harmonious domestic life, on which the family attempts to model itself, derives not from spontaneous feeling but from external sources, and the effort to conform to it therefore implicates the family in a charade of togetherness or âpseudo-mutuality,â as one student of schizophrenia calls it.
The mother in particular, on whom the work of childrearing devolves by default, attempts to become an ideal parent, compensating for her lack of spontaneous feeling for the child by smothering him with solicitude. Abstractly convinced that her child deserves the best of everything, she arranges each detail of his life with a punctilious zeal that undermines his initiative and destroys the capacity for self-help. She leaves the child with the feeling, according to Kohut, that he has âno mind of his own.â His idealistically inflated impressions of the mother persist un-modified by later experience, mingling in his unconscious thoughts with fantasies of infantile omnipotence.â
âLasch, Christopher
Sons & Daughters, of Single Mothers
Some find it admirable when a female raises children on her own. The concept of âit takes a tribeâ returns us back to our primate past when one dominant male fathered offspring with a group of females, all of which cooperated in their upbringing; beta-males were a diversion, and nothing more than potential intergroup allies, females could sexually manipulate to gain their support, and an ever-ready source of genetic diversification, because nobody can predict how environments might change.
Have we not reverted back to that period? Only now, in the west, alpha-male status is monopolized by institutions, and all biological males relegated to betas.
The hypothetical âsingle motherâ is now bringing in stray males to make her feel feminine because the real alpha has no corporeal presence to gratify her physical and emotional needs; it has become an abstraction that may very-well be represented by anything: another female, or even a cat. Yet, âsingle mothersâ are not truly single, they are affianced to the State, cared for and protected by institutions; they belong to the system they have given themselves to. Biological males are adopted as their caretakers, surrogate male representatives of institutional power. If they refuse to play this role they are surreptitiously excluded from participating.
Children with no father figures, no real fathers, grow up seeking values from the only masculine entities available to them: institutions. Children, especially boys, raised by institutionalized mothers, eventually rebel against their paternal authorities â as it is in their nature to do â turning to ancillary sources of identity, conveniently finding them in pop-cultural ideals, offering antiauthoritarian alternatives to their restless spirits; they rebel against the State, as their only true father-figure. Daughters born within this environment grow up to reflect their motherâs attitude towards sex, males, and the world at large. With no flesh & blood father-figure they find in the institutional ideal a type no real male can ever match, consequently giving themselves to their careers to feel fulfilled, viz., de facto nuptial relationships with their chosen institution that can never entirely satisfy their feminine needs â if they do not become single mothers, they remain childless spinsters blaming men for their fate.
1 Like
âŚthe premise of the Abrahamic religion is cuckoldry. How are you that dense not to understand? The offering of Abraham, to murder his only-begotten son, as a test of Faith to God, is symbolic of all the Abrahamic branches: Christianity, Judaism, Islam. Furthermore, in Christianity, the âSpirit of Godâ (divine ejaculate) birthed Jesus Christ, not Josephâs seed. How is that not cuckoldry?
In chimp society (our closest ancestors) it is not only male alphas that get laid. In Lion societies it is only the male alphas that get laid. Lion societies have mass inceldom, mass amounts of uninvested and exiled males, and widespread bisexuality/homosexuality as a result.
Society ought not to only have alpha males getting laid. In chimps it is not only alphas getting laid, but alphaâs choose who gets laid or boost the betas. But the outsiders who are not part of the alphaâs group sometimes also get laid as well, as sneaker males.
Chimps have multiple small tribes with alphas in each tribe, rather than large nations. Human inceldom began around the Agricultural age when tribalism ceased and society became larger. Modern society only has 2 tribes now: Abrahamism and woke. Either a male must follow Abrahamism, or they must follow the woke, or else they will get rejected by women. Or they can try to be sneaker males and pretend to follow religion. Neither tribes of Abrahamism, or woke, have true alphas, but only priests which are betas of imaginary alphas, interpreting the doctrine. Neither Abrahamism or woke are true cults, because a cult has a physical leader. Both are pseudo-democracies ruled by books and priests.
Chimps and other monkey species integrated Beta males into the sexual fold, because a group of warriors is more powerful than just-one male with a harem: Organized warfare.
YesâŚand we as primates have adopted this and added ethical amendments to our moral behaviors, allowing inferior males to become investors in the welfare of the group.
They call it paternalism.
A restriction on male and primarily female sexual behaviors, allowing the establishment of traditional families as the foundation of civilization.
But thatâs breaking down, partly through the infection of western man by subversive parasitical ideologies, that promote primal behaviors, undermining out societies.
Like feminismâŚhomosexual rights, transsexual rights, abortion rights, âŚall destroying family values and promoting promiscuous lifestyles.
No society can survive that, for long.
Couldnât it just be out of the kindness of their hearts? Why does everyone have to be savages?
canât LGBTâs embrace monogamy? Or is monogamy only possible in the Abrahamic framework which is coincidentally anti-LGBT?
Lol, no⌠I remember being a romantic idealist in my 20s tooâŚ
Altruism and selflessness maybe the greatest anomaly in biological existence. Animals and organisms donât give their lives away for strangers, freely. Life expects a return on that investment.
Male homosexuals tend to be promiscuous.
But monogamy is not the issue.
Itâs that parahilic relationships cannot produce offspring, and they promote lifestyles that reduce birth rates.
Humans are overpopulated anyway. Low birthrates mean that capitalists cannot make enough profits and not enough workers. But there will be robots anyway.
What about just not being a greedy asshole? Like a lion that hoards all the women to themself? Not charity but just not being an asshole?