**TL;DR** We must secure the existence of a White ethno-galaxy and the future for our people
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You must log in or sign up to comment
9 comments:
9
1 year ago
9 points
(+0
/
-0
/
+9Score on mirror
)
1 child
Permalink
Reply
Mirrored from scored.co
0
1 year ago
0 points
(+0
/
-0
)
Death to all Xeno scum. Hail the Emporer of Emporers, Jesus Christ.
Permalink
Reply
Mirrored from scored.co
I don't know why a universal moral code would be desirable let alone possible (it's not).
races have different hardwired instincts and these instincts inform the cultures they build and the morals they live by. you want them to live by some other moral code? that's going to require ongoing violence on your part, forever. or gene editing.
you're living this reality right now so it should be self-evidently true.
races have different hardwired instincts and these instincts inform the cultures they build and the morals they live by. you want them to live by some other moral code? that's going to require ongoing violence on your part, forever. or gene editing.
you're living this reality right now so it should be self-evidently true.
I agree that the races have different hardwired instincts, but that doesn't mean there is no correct moral standard. The fact that only Whites have the instinct to form the basis of objective morality, is precisely the reason we should hold exclusive access to moral agency.
If the other races can't live within the objective moral framework, even as low-agency second-class citizens, then they hardly deserve to live at all
If the other races can't live within the objective moral framework, even as low-agency second-class citizens, then they hardly deserve to live at all
The idea of objective morality carries with it the idea that it can be imparted to any moral creature, regardless of their instincts.
I think this is not only possible, but has been done before. Think about Blacks in America before the Civil Rights Act. In the cities, where they form large groups, they're obviously violent criminals. But in the rural areas, where they're surrounded by Whites, they were generally hardworking, churchgoing, and well kept. I think this actually has less to do with them trying to fit in than it does with their inherent contrariness; the laws held them to be second class citizens so they tried their best to act the same as Whites. When the laws treat them as equals, they do their best to act like savages.
We were on to something by having different laws for different races.
I think this is not only possible, but has been done before. Think about Blacks in America before the Civil Rights Act. In the cities, where they form large groups, they're obviously violent criminals. But in the rural areas, where they're surrounded by Whites, they were generally hardworking, churchgoing, and well kept. I think this actually has less to do with them trying to fit in than it does with their inherent contrariness; the laws held them to be second class citizens so they tried their best to act the same as Whites. When the laws treat them as equals, they do their best to act like savages.
We were on to something by having different laws for different races.
yeah, this is one of the largest mistakes in Christianity - universalism.
what you're experiencing right now is cognitive dissonance. you know what I say is true but you really, really want this other thing you value highly to also be true, but they conflict. what was your solution? and I quote, "then they hardly deserve to live at all". your solution was mass murder. that's what cognitive dissonance does to a person.
maybe your guys need to get on to writing the long lost texts of the Black Bible, so that lower-hemisphere people have something to live by that aligns with their instincts but that you can also feel comfortable with letting them live without mass murdering them.
what you're experiencing right now is cognitive dissonance. you know what I say is true but you really, really want this other thing you value highly to also be true, but they conflict. what was your solution? and I quote, "then they hardly deserve to live at all". your solution was mass murder. that's what cognitive dissonance does to a person.
maybe your guys need to get on to writing the long lost texts of the Black Bible, so that lower-hemisphere people have something to live by that aligns with their instincts but that you can also feel comfortable with letting them live without mass murdering them.
add race (back) into the bible, or you could just do the other thing to enforce your moral code: violently oppress and police them, forever. or do nothing and accept their escalating violence and self-subjugation & eventual annihilation of your culture and moral code.
Discrimination and racism were perfectly useful ways to allow minorities to live according to the level of their moral responsibility. I don't see how a final solution to the non-White question is dissonant at all. I agreed that what you said is true, racial instincts inform morality. What I don't agree with is that this makes no moral standard objectively best. Just because niggers think raping and stealing is immediately beneficial to them, doesn't make it objectively good
> By arbitrary, I mean that it cannot be universalised i.e. the right for me to discriminate against niggers and the right for niggers to discriminate against me is morally relative.
Disconnect yourself from the idea of applying morality to niggers. Niggers are non-human, feral animals. We tolerate living with them because we *must*, and are forced by our own peers, as they are under special protection as if they were like humans.
If you kill a nigger, it's not murder. The ZOG will go after it, but in terms of consciousness I don't consider killing a nigger "murder." I put it on the same spectrum as exterminating an underground wasp hive of aggressive wasps, but better.
I'd feel worse killing a cat or dog. While driving in a city I *almost* hit a nice dog that walked over a crosswalk, but was behind a car on the left, and the lights were red for it. I felt bad for days, and thought about how to do better - but it was really a very rare situation. It seemed like a nice, smart dog. But killing a nigger, gypsy, sandnigger, pajeet? Lmao. I carry a machete in my car or when hiking *just in case*.
A relative of mine was stopped by a gang of gypsies on a desolate road, and then robbed. Absolutely pathetic. It would be amazing if that would happen to me. Rightful self-defence, a free extermination of multiple gypsies without witnesses? Can it get any better than that?
Disconnect yourself from the idea of applying morality to niggers. Niggers are non-human, feral animals. We tolerate living with them because we *must*, and are forced by our own peers, as they are under special protection as if they were like humans.
If you kill a nigger, it's not murder. The ZOG will go after it, but in terms of consciousness I don't consider killing a nigger "murder." I put it on the same spectrum as exterminating an underground wasp hive of aggressive wasps, but better.
I'd feel worse killing a cat or dog. While driving in a city I *almost* hit a nice dog that walked over a crosswalk, but was behind a car on the left, and the lights were red for it. I felt bad for days, and thought about how to do better - but it was really a very rare situation. It seemed like a nice, smart dog. But killing a nigger, gypsy, sandnigger, pajeet? Lmao. I carry a machete in my car or when hiking *just in case*.
A relative of mine was stopped by a gang of gypsies on a desolate road, and then robbed. Absolutely pathetic. It would be amazing if that would happen to me. Rightful self-defence, a free extermination of multiple gypsies without witnesses? Can it get any better than that?
Toast message