Consume Product

The point of Charity in Christianity was that helping the poor was done on an individual basis and is a personal act of virtue. Christ actually rebukes His disciples at least twice for trying to put the poor before Him, because service to the poor is a means to an end of increasing personal virtue, and not the end in and of itself. Because Liberal Humanism and its various children completely remove God from the equation when it comes to what they claim is "Charity", helping the poor goes from a personal act of virtue to a burden imposed on society. This in turn drags society down to its lowest common denominator instead of encouraging individual virtue.

True, Twitter op is fucking stupid though.

The ancient germanic people didn't just go out and ritually sacrifice everyone who was ugly. They weren't aztecs or canaanites. There have only been a few bodies found who were sacrificial victims and it was mainly for faggotry or some kind of high level crime (murder, rape, etc). Not because someone was ugly. If that were the case, there would have been thousands of Bog bodies found at this point. Human sacrifice was not a large part of their culture, or any indo european culture for that matter.

>This is why as nomadic barbarians they could challenge rome at every point in history

I love teutoberg as much as anyone else, but the germanic people had their fair share of absolute losses against the romans.

They also weren't nomadic at this point. They lived in permanent settled communities. They had agriculture. They had standing armies. And no, their standing armies were not made up of naked berserkers who could take on 6 trillion romans at one time. They had advanced (at the time) mail armor, better than what the romans had, and weapons that were up to par with what the romans had.

This is the white version of the "noble savage", not rebuking Hollywood (ultimately roman) myths, but romanticizing them at face value. The germanic people were far from barbarians and far from nomadic. They weren't prehistoric stone aged people who only beat the romans because they were 8 feet tall and 400 lbs of pure muscle or some other horseshit.

And the (christian) goths would later conquer rome with standing armies, clad in modern armor and weapons, and using modern military strategies and logistics. Not a wave of brutish barbarians. The barbarian hordes myth probably exists because of that stupid ahistotical fucking painting by Joseph-Noël Sylvestre, "the sack of rome". I despise this painting in particular very much.

The bottom quintile is the excuse they use, this shit is actually to support the 2% of kikes in the US and pisrael.

Not a fan of 'noble savage' theories.

"Civilizations" as they're pitched in Century21[tm] are *anti-*evolutionary in that they specifically **preserve** the dysgenic traits and behaviors that destroy families, tribes and nations.

The successful empires and nations of old **culled** what they (correctly) saw as threats to their people and institutions.

No, it's because all your resources are stolen and given to foreign nonhumans

Here's my social idea:

1. You take care of yourself. If you can't feed and clothe and shelter yourself, then you will probably die. Too bad.
2. You take care of your family. If you can't feed and clothe and shelter your family, then they will probably die and it's your fault. Too bad. In exchange, you need to organize your family to help and assist.
3. If you want to take on the responsibility for anyone else, then go for it. Either you take them on as a slave / servant / employee or you do it because you feel like it and send them on their way. If you decide not to help someone, then that's sad and they die, oh well, it is not your fault.
4. If people think this isn't fair, then they can talk to God and ask him to make it right. If God doesn't do anything about it, then too bad. You're still starving and if you don't find food fast you will die and that's your fault.

People think slavery is a terrible arrangement but I don't think so. I think it's actually a good way to take care of the really stupid and poor people and people who made really bad decisions. In exchange for charity, the slaveholder gets some labor from their slave, which will never be enough to compensate (otherwise the slave would be able to live as a free man.)

If you look at biblical slavery, God commanded the Israelites not to take slaves from their own kind. They were free to sell themselves into slavery, or their kids, but the slaves who were Israelites got special treatment including the opportunity to be freed at no charge if they so desired. God also commanded a significant welfare effort where during harvest, they were supposed to leave some of the sheaths behind so that poor people could collect them and thresh them and grind their own flour. They were also supposed to allow travelers to take food from the edges of their farms.

In our American society, we should abolish all forms of government assistance. If you want money from the government, you have to provide a good or service of similar value, and you have to compete with others for that money, just like with any company. If you are too disabled to care for yourself, then your family is required to handle you. If they can't or won't, too bad, maybe someone will take care of you and take you on as a servant or slave. That said, we need to make sure there are plenty of opportunities for poor people to get ahead. That's on those who have been blessed with enough and to spare.

The Aryan barbarians had to destroy Rome.

It becamee too degenerate.

God tried to save us mayos from covid by sending down Jesus to China in the mid 1800's to fix the chink empire.

But then mayos from France and Britain decided to help the decadent Qing, and they unfortunately defeated the christfag chink rebellion.

God then unleased covid on us in 2020 to punish us for saving the chinks from the Taiping Godly Wrath.