The Great Men On Educated Women

QFT from the self-improvement guide “Might is Right”, authored in 1890 by an Original Realtalker:

There is nothing particularly inviting about barren, dyspeptic, blue-stocking ‘New Women,’ in pants and spectacles; talking idiotic snuffle through their noses; with busts made of adjustable india-rubber; with narrow or padded hips, and “wheels between their legs,” scorching across the curbstones like mad. When such women are ‘captured’ what good are they? They won’t even breed; or if they do so (by accident) their puny embryos, have to be delicately nurtured into life with steam-heated incubator-mechanism and afterwards fed and weaned on ‘the bottle.’ The sons of such women — bottle fed abortions — of what good are they?

It is women of this kind (unnatural monsters they are) that cause so much domestic unhappiness. They have been “educated” along false lines, filled with bookish artificialism, and thereafter when called upon to take up their maternal duty, they are organic incapables. Hence the divorce court scandals — the fruit of wholesale degeneracy — encouraged by State interference with domestic affairs.

Gradually the curse of ‘Law’ invades the privacy of every home. It encourages emotional feminines to defy husbands, and Deify an irresponsible Authority. In other words it deliberately promotes unfaithfulness and unlimited free-love. It undermines the husband’s Control, but at what a dreadful cost? With the “equalization” of women comes wholesale panmixia — scientific concubinage, State-regulated polyandry, and the poisoning of all inter-family intercourse. When average women find in Statute Law a “deliverer” and a “champion” more powerful than their husbands and brothers, they become both unfaithful and profligate — especially if “well educated.”

-Ragnar Redbeard, patron saint of Chateau Heartiste.

Bonus! R.R. on open borders, miscegenation, and alien mystery meats:

Purity of blood has played (and is yet to play) a leading role in the drama of racial evolution. Races held in bondage are necessarily mongrelized, degraded, ‘equalized.’ Homeliness is one result of bad breeding.

When a higher type allies itself by marriage with a lower, it paves the way for its own ultimate degeneracy. When Spartans and Athenians mixed themselves with imported Asiatic and Egyptian slaves, their downfall was foretold; and when “Equality” became the motto of Christian Italy; Latins, Asiatics, and Negroes miscegenated, evolving the modern ‘Dago’ — who slaves for the descendents of the men his ancestors conquered.

There should be a designation for Realtalk™ that reaches beyond discomfiting truths to something even more bowel-shaking. Scrotalk™?





Comments


  1. The scourge of feminism had already raised its ugly head in the 1890s…wow.

    [CH: correct. this is why i believe the source of feminism wasn’t from the land of eskimos. eskimos came later and of course took over the ideology en masse, providing its structural support and presiding over its fall into inanity during the 20th century and to the present.]

    Like


    • The Eskimos were creating future Bolsheviks in the 1890s and had also already coopted Femionism too.

      Like


      • on October 13, 2015 at 11:16 am Captain Obvious

        Exactly – read about the work of Alexander Berkman and Emma Goldman poisoning the well of American munificence beginning as children in the 1880s. They attempted to assassinate Henry Clay Frick in 1892, and they successfully assassinated [ANTI-GLOBALIST] President McKinley in 1901 [McKinley had authored the 1890 tariff act, and we got GLOBALIST Theodore Roosevelt as McKinley’s replacement].

        Like


      • It’s all in the protocols.

        Like


      • on October 13, 2015 at 2:13 pm Carlos Danger

        WRT Russian compassion versus German compassion, its about the same. Both nationalities can be massive dicks and capable of great charity at once.

        Like


      • It’s a Jesuit trick.
        Gaiaism.
        Atheism.
        Darwinism.
        Marxism.

        It is amazing to me how so many of “the chosen” fall for the lies and become the patsies, espousing the ideas and then getting the blame.

        Ah well, it has always been so from the very founding of the order, that they infiltrate and find useful fools (who then find their own useful idiots).

        Like


    • The origin of something may make for nice parlour chatter or serve as a source of pride for whoever wishes to identify with said source.

      But in the grand scheme of things, it means little…

      Those who pick up the symbolic ball and run with it towards their given goal line… be said goal for good or evil… are the ones who deserve the actual credit… or blame.

      In short… I don’t care who “invented” feminism or started the ball rolling… I just see who picked it up and ran with it… for purposes not to benefit women, rather, to destroy the West… and with it, the entirety of Mankind’s hope for an existence beyond the squalor of coffee-colored poebbelvolk eking out their bread-and-circus subsistence outside of the gated communities of the puppet-masters and their treasonous stooges.

      Like


      • There was a joke I’d heard once:

        The difference between Germans and Russians.

        A German farmer once noticed that his neighbor was wealthier than he was, so he vowed: “If it takes me the rest of my life, my land, my fortune, one day I will make myself as rich as he is.”

        A Russian farmer once noticed that his neighbor was wealthier than he was, so he vowed: “If it takes me the rest of my life, my land, my fortune, one day I will make him as poor as I am.”

        It’s possible that originally, in the past, Feminism was sold as a movement to do what’s best for women, paving the way for true equality. It’s possible that the movement was originally about raising women up.

        Today, Feminism doesn’t care about whether or not it’s destroying the lives of women (which it is). The movement cares only about whether or not it is destroying the lives of men. Feminism exists today to tear men down.

        Like


      • Funny you should mention that Russian variation of said joke.

        Back when Who Wants To Be A Millionaire was enjoying it’s rage throughout the world, I heard that in Russia the contestants seldom used Ask The Audience lifeline, because said audience would purposely give the wrong answer.

        Don’t know if that story was apocryphal or not, but your joke brought it back to mind.

        Like


      • @Greg I wonder, then, how the Russians would score on the (Compassion, I think it was. Maybe it was Empathy) test CH noted a while back from that Canadian University study. If (60%?) of Whites score high, but only 10% of Blacks do, then there’s a difference between Whites and Blacks. But how about between Whites? Do Russians score low where the English score high?

        [CH: i wouldn’t doubt that there’d be a white interethnic difference in ability to empathize.]

        Like


    • CH: You’re right. Women of Germanic lands, including Anglo women, have been known for their relative strength and freedom since at least Tacitus almost 2000 years ago. Feminism was inevitable once the West (‘greater Germania’) became sufficiently spoiled and affluent. Think Ibsen’s ‘The Doll House.’ And Norway wasn’t even all that spoiled or affluent in Ibsen’s time, though his Christiana set was.

      But the Eskimos amplify – they bring out the worst in us.

      Like


      • The fact that Germanics could treat each other like human beings has nothing to do with feminism. And socialism, from which feminism comes, was embraced wholeheartedly in “macho” Med countries – and in East Europe, needless to say. And in non-White countries like China, where feminism was exalted – just look at the Red Guardists in the Cultural Revolution, so very often ugly girls who wanted a chance to lord it over the other students, and were given that chance.

        Viking women had the right to defend themselves if beaten by their husbands, and they could get a divorce if they were beaten, insulted, or if the husband shamed the family by e.g. wearing his shirt open over the chest in public. Viking women held the keys to the farm, with management of the farm economy, the children and the thralls. Yes. This was not feminism, it was just natural and efficient, and could only be compared to feminism in a later society twisted by an alien Jewish religion that treated women like trash because its founders wanted advantages for themselves. Typical Jewish greed.

        Men and women cooperating is as much “feminist” as caring for workers is “socialism”. The Left simply exploits some legitimate concerns – regarding women, workers, the environment – and use them to demonize their targets. But they don’t actually care about women, workers or the environment. Note how they ignored that workers were slaves in the Soviet Union, forced to work where the commissars placed them and forbidden to leave. Note how they don’t make any documentaries about the massive environmental destruction in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, or tell school children about that, the worst environmental catastrophe in human history. Note how they say nothing about 1,400 girls being raped in Rotherham, or about the serial rapist Bill Clinton. They say nothing about how immigrants treat women. They don’t actually care. Feminism is not about women.

        Like


      • ” Note how they say nothing about 1,400 girls being raped in Rotherham”

        Lol.

        1400 girls didn’t get raped in Rotherham. 1400 girls were fucked by grown men (which is referred to as “rape” by nitwits, regardless of consent) and some of them were actually raped.

        What I’m saying is that your statement wrt 1400 getting raped isn’t true. The number of girls getting “rape-raped” is not 1400.

        I aim to please magn.

        Like


      • @Arbiter Germanics were barbarians, who couldn’t sustain a civilization until they were Christianized. Their “egalitarianism was actually one of the reasons for this, since without specialization, progress was certainly slow. Hence they were running in the forest with animal skins and killing each other unnecessarily, leaving almost no trace of their ancient history while Greeks and Romans were building a legacy, the fundament upon which the Western civilization grew up.

        This was not feminism, it was just natural and efficient, and could only be compared to feminism in a later society twisted by an alien Jewish religion that treated women like trash because its founders wanted advantages for themselves. Typical Jewish greed.

        It might be Judaism but Christianity was the best thing to happen to women and commoners throughout Europe.

        Like


    • Ragnar Redbeard? Was the original written in English? If not, what language? I don’t know everything (at all) and would appreciate being pointed to specific books by, and about RR. I trust the men here more than the cultmarx Wikipedia. Cheers

      Like


      • on October 13, 2015 at 11:43 am Captain Obvious

        “The most likely candidate is a man named Arthur Desmond who was red-bearded, red-haired and whose poetry was very similar to that written by Redbeard.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Might_Is_Right

        Like


      • on October 13, 2015 at 4:44 pm long time lurker

        Might is Right by Ragnar Redbeard is a most enjoyable rant/polemic which was originally published in 1890, or so the blurb on the back of the book claims. However, after reading it I noticed that it makes references to quotes made after it was published. For example, on p82 a quote from the millionaire editor of the Chicago Times-Herald was dated as 13-11-96. On p93 another quote attributed to the St James Gazette in ’96. P105 Admiral Walker, US Navy, Dec 1896. How can it quote people six years after it was printed?

        Could it be that it’s a hoax? The subject matter, turns of phrase and attitudes struck me as being either indicative of the timelessness of these issues (problems then were similar to problems now) or it’s a cleverly written modern-day rant that is pretending to be from the 19th Century to… avoid criticism? Appear more exotic? Highlight the foppish attitude of modern men compared to the demi-gods that unapologetically strode the Earth in days of yore?

        Who can tell? I thoroughly enjoyed the book but I’m still unconvinced that it’s a genuine 19th Century publication.

        Like


      • @long time lurker, Desmond published the book in several different editions, the last one being in 1927. He kept tinkering with the book as he did so. Accordingly, there will be minor differences in the book depending on which edition you have. So, no it’s not a hoax, just a guy who couldn’t stop fooling with his opus.

        Like


      • on October 14, 2015 at 3:11 am long time lurker

        @Dude: in that case it’s even more astounding at just how relevant the text is to the modern world. Thanks for the info, I think I’ll have to read it again with that in mind.

        Like


      • Ragnar Redbeard was a pseudonym for Jack London.

        Like


    • Feminism certainly predates both modern Zionism and socialism (which other commenters point to). Mary Wollstonecraft was publishing books on feminism in the 1792’s, to the agreement of other contemporary Enlightenment writers and philosophers.

      Like


    • Feminism was born in the French revolution. feminist book was by Mary Wollstonecraft, 1793, or something like that. The first socialists were feminists, too, around 1825-30. Feminism really caught on, though, after John Stuart Mill published The Subjection of Woman, in the 1860s.

      Like


      • on October 13, 2015 at 1:14 pm The Spirit Within

        Don’t forget the Seneca Falls Convention, basically the first feminist conference. It was organized in 1848 by the Quakers, particularly Lucretia Mott.

        Back then, their biggest gripe was wives who were being beaten by drunken husbands every night. (A reasonable complaint.) That’s why they yoked themselves so closely to the temperance movement.

        Liked by 1 person


      • on October 13, 2015 at 2:11 pm Carlos Danger

        Funny thing about it too was the divorce rate was also 70% initiated by women then.

        Liked by 1 person


    • The Enemy had already targeted the femme after the French revolution. Carlos Danger talked about Luciferian inversion in a comment, and this is what is happening: God below Man, man below woman…

      Like


    • The key phrase is “necessary, but not sufficient.” There are degenerate tendencies among us Whites, but our current debacle would not be nearly as horrifying nor would it have come upon us as fast without Chosenite catalyzation.

      Like


  2. MonumenTalk.
    Because you are arguing with the monument from Space Odyssey 2001

    Like


  3. This guy knew what was what. That’s a helluva pseudonym.

    Like


  4. Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis for the masses is the only thing that’s going to save us now. Given a choice most mixed raced couples and people with some non-white heritage would choose to bear children that have a ‘whiter’ genetic make-up. Thus making future generations of better breeding.

    Though, I’ve heard PGD has been used to make deaf babies, I guess degeneracy will always find a way.

    Like


      • on October 13, 2015 at 11:06 am Captain Obvious

        Yeah, I thought about bumping that story in the last day or so. ALL WOMYNZ ARE NUTS TO AT LEAST A MILD DEGREE – that’s the nature of progesterone and estrogen and Cluster B and Cluster C and whatnot – but when Eskimo Psychiatry [and e.g. its Hollyweird and ABC/NBC/CBS and Gramscian Universitardian subsidiaries] began poisoning the culture 24×7, and destroying all of the old traditions and taboos and cultural safeguards against this insanity, a huge portion of the female population simply lost its collective mind.

        Like


      • Under normal circumstances the doctor would be hunted down and kicked out of practice, whether medical or psych, for malpractice. I have a guess only – that the one who put the drops of drain cleaner in, was Eskimo.

        Like


    • on October 13, 2015 at 10:57 am Captain Obvious

      > “They won’t even breed; or if they do so (by accident) their puny embryos, have to be delicately nurtured into life with steam-heated incubator-mechanism and afterwards fed and weaned on ‘the bottle’… When a higher type allies itself by marriage with a lower, it paves the way for its own ultimate degeneracy.” ——— There’s some internal inconsistency here. Absent at least some outbreeding, Steve Sellout’s “Partially Inbred Extended Families” rapidly degenerate into “Fully Inbred Completely Incestuous Families”, which gets you Ashkenazic Eskimos riddled with Tay Sachs and European Royalty overcome by Haemophilia.

      Like


      • on October 13, 2015 at 11:22 am Captain Obvious

        Steve Sellout also used to be very fascinated by Sir Francis Galton’s theory of “Regression toward the mean”. We were talking the other day about Eskimo inbreeding, and WhoreFinder had posited that the Eskimo fascination with incest [e.g. Woody Allen banging Soon Yi Previn] might be required in order to keep the inbreeding alive. But I had told WF that that very same inbreeding could be why Eskimo chicks are so desperate for our seed – because their hindbrains know that they are badly inbred, and that they had better do some outbreeding or else the entire race will become unfit to survive. And “Regression toward the mean” could be a necessary survival mechanism for these badly inbred groups [European royalty, Eskimos, Brahmin-caste Cow Worshippers] to continue to persist.

        Like


      • on October 13, 2015 at 11:32 am Captain Obvious

        And obviously, if you have to outbreed, then it’s imperative that the girl’s FATHER have a strong say in the choice of the foreign sire [otherwise the daughter will just hop onto the nearest boat for a semester abroad in Nigeria, and start miscegenating with dozens if not hundreds of Nogs]. BTW, both “Water World” and “Stargate SG1” examined the question of inbreeding from the Sci-Fi angle: In WW, the chinaman needed Kevin Costner’s seed for his gook daughter, and in SG1, the Asgard inbred themselves into extinction.

        Like


      • CO, the threshold for staying out of inbreeding depression is a population of, what, 200?

        I’m deliberately piping in out of relative ignorance precisely because this is an AP Biology question, not a great unexplored mystery of the universe or anything.

        I would rather marry a box of Kleenex than let Ashkenazi DNA into my lineage, and the millennia of inbreeding obviously play some part in Eskimo psychological problems; but really, maybe they are just cursed by God.

        I mean, they’re knocking up gooks and what do they get? Emma Sulkowicz.

        I don’t think they can outbreed the crazy out of them. If nothing else, their damned Talmud and its consanguineous heresies (Marxism, Freudianism, Feminism) keep them tribalistic and nuts, no matter how they splice their DNA. Maybe the Jewish HIV mind virus is so damned strong, it even survives no matter what they do with their DNA.

        But then, Bantu blood will out, too. Let not poison take pride, that it overrules health.

        Like


      • This is not accurate. The Asgard stopped breeding (sexually) at all. Everything was done via cloning…

        Like


      • on October 13, 2015 at 4:17 pm Captain Tautological

        Right – and then at the very end, the DNA became so f*cked up that even the cloning couldn’t help the Asgard anymore. This is explained in the penultimate episode of SG1, called “Dominion” [#213 overall; Season 10, #19] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stargate_SG-1_episodes#Season_10_.282006.E2.80.9307.29

        Like


      • on October 13, 2015 at 4:27 pm Captain Tautological

        > “I would rather marry a box of Kleenex than let Ashkenazi DNA into my lineage” ——— I’d laugh if I didn’t have a lot of actual experience with this in the Real World. BTW, I was walking through a door today, and an obviously Ashkenazic little Eskimo-ess, maybe 6yo to 8yo, stepped aside so that I could come out, and when Mr Tall Dark & Handsome Shegetz stared down at her, and smiled, her eyes lit up like a [email protected] Christmas tree. Even at her tender young pre-menarche age, her poor hindbrain is already abundantly aware that her bloodlines desperately need Shegetz seed for rejuvenation. Her aging fat ugly Muter, on the other hand, walked past me as though I didn’t even exist. Boy are her Muter und Foter gonna be in for a surprise, come menarche. LOL’ed.

        Like


  5. […] The Great Men On Educated Women […]

    Like


  6. He wrote than in 1890, eh?

    That’s some powerful one-two punch Mencken-Nostradamus material there.

    Like


  7. Good God. It’s like if Pleasureman, CH and Roosh had a fusion and moved back to 1890.

    “The sons of such women — bottle fed abortions — of what good are they?”

    http://www.rooshv.com/naomi-wolf-is-a-delusional-old-hag

    PS: Roosh used to be utterly savage with the shiv. Staggering.

    Like


  8. Its amazing to see such realtalk from a time when such problems were ostensibly minor and in their infancy. Either the problem was much worse than we imagine it was and its merely been exploded with wifi and social media… or these great men of old had very keen senses. I posit its a little of both. Human nature doesn’t change and you either have your finger on its pulse or you don’t. I often feel this way of Henry Ford. There were barely any eskimos in his America and he was just hammering it (with prescient accuracy, IMO).

    Like


    • That “all was forgiven” (seemingly) and Ford got away with The International Jew still boggles my mind.

      Then again, that ol’ Dynamic Silence routine in re his non-automotive endeavors seems to have worked… everyone knows Ford cars, few know The International Jew.

      Like


      • Been paying any attention to what the Ford Foundation is up to lately?

        Like


      • Henry was ultimately brought to heel financially and recanted in the approved fashion. He died an embittered man.

        Like


      • Good point… I’m sure after Edsel, the foundation vultures have wormed their way into things, like all else.

        Still, I’m surprised they’ve left the name (reputation) of Henry relatively intact.

        Like


    • on October 13, 2015 at 11:40 am Captain Obvious

      +1000 on shartiste. The Great Men saw all of this coming. ALL OF IT. Lone voices in the wilderness screaming bloody murder. Which, in turn explains Eskimo Psychiatry’s ubiquitous and incessant use of the “paranoia” and “did you stop taking your meds” and “tinfoil hat” poisoning of the discourse [that e.g. we get some much from Director Tamir Pardo’s operatives]. Eskimo Psychiatry is just using Saul Alinsky’s “Isolate and Destroy” techniques against the Truth Speak of the Great Men.

      Like


  9. I wonder how many “secret atheist” men fake being a Christian for access to more traditional women and a shot at a family… It seems here in America, the devoutly religious are one of the the only remaining groups that still has some respect for a real woman (in the white world anyway).

    I’m 33. I don’t believe in God/Christianity. I like the idea of a family, but the quality of the dating market is just garbage. A bunch of loud, unfeminine, career obsessed progressives… The type of women that are difficult just to be around, much less have a family with.

    There’s just no incentive to be a good man anymore. There are very few women worth keeping around, and I refuse to live as a lie, pretending to be a Christian just for the possibility of meeting a good woman through a church. I actually like the idea of a stable family with a good women. I actually want to be the “good man,” and raise a moral family, but I’ve instead turned to a life of sport fucking and game… that’s what our society, the welfare state, rampant feminism has brought us: A system that rewards cads with free disposable sex, and the rest with a hateful ex wife and years of child support/alimony. Why would anyone sign up for that anymore?

    It’s all such shit. Why would I even want to bring a son into this mess anyway?

    Like


    • Muh Kipling. I recommend If and The White Man’s Burden.

      Like


    • Xtians are pretty much all hypocrites who hold up their religion as a badge to hide behind. I have yet to see one who is truly moral – they follow whatever is Politically Correct. Even the ones who grumble about mass immigration in private. No, they are not the origin of “family values”, they just adopted them because the Right dominated and now betray them because the Left says so.

      Funny to hear some Xtians go, “But-but-but you’re supposed to be conservative! How can this beee?” when the churches repeatedly betray them. Not just going along with mass immigration but actively promoting it. They don’t understand that churches and their religion just attach themselves to whatever is the ruling ideology. It used to be conservatism, so churches talked about conservatism. While always keeping their anti-conservative slave morality, opposing a racial goal as the basis for the Right, thereby denying the West a justification for its empires and paving the way for their destruction. The church in South Africa is a prime example, turning against the Whites with its propaganda. South Africa wouldn’t have turned into hell if it hadn’t been for the church. Churches eagerly switched to open socialist goals once the socialists came to dominate. Today’s pope is not anti-Catholic, he is its perfect expression. The Xtian leaders are natural allies to the Jews, their founders. Both religions are based on victimology, or what Nietzsche called slave morality.

      Hell, Xtianity even settled on a symbol based on victimology. “Look, you evil Romans snuffed our supposed founder with your execution device the cross, so now you can’t criticize us! We are good because we are victims!” The Jews taught them well.

      Like


      • Well, even Christians are still thrall to the curse of Adam and Eve’s rebellion, and continue to fall short of the glory of the Most High.

        But damn, I wish you’d stop throwing the baby out with the bathwater. 😡

        Matt’s a Christian… I’m a Christian… several others here are Christians…

        Do WE sound politically correct and mesmerized by the Cathedral and their puppet-masters?

        Liked by 1 person


      • You’re being a little to hard on Christianity. Whites were essentially bands of warring tribes until the Christianization of Europe. If we can thank Christianity for one thing it is that it bound all Europeans with a single, albeit synthetic thread. Christianity began to fail when it ceased to see itself as an Aryan religion. In the future, I see a societal return to Christianity as the only longterm solution to our problems. Of course, we will need a healthy dose of masculine, pagan warrior ethos… Probably a lot more at first.

        Like


      • on October 13, 2015 at 1:19 pm The Spirit Within

        Christianity didn’t fall apart because it became “less Aryan”. A glance at history tells you that it fell apart in the fifteenth century, by which time it had grown so corrupt that monks were becoming millionaires on the sales of indulgences and popes were having enemies murdered. Ever hear of the Reformation? The Wars of Religion?

        Like


      • You are incorrect, and perhaps in ignorance. The Catholicism is where you need to invest, the natural enemy of the Enemy. Balmung is right when he says that the Catholic Church offers the best platform to form a cohesive front against the Enemy, but it needs to be cleansed of liberal catholics and infiltrators. The instant benefit you will get is a fixed Truth to rebuild your spirituality, and in the long run, a return to the natural order.

        Like


      • Some of those indulgences were damn good value. Don’t knock ’em.

        Like


      • The I see it, it is ideologies that are the primary culprits, with respect to the Jewish Question, as well as with the taint that is the Christian-brand on western culture.

        What are the psychological ramifications of conditioning members of a community to believe, that by birth-right, they are the few that are among god’s chosen people? As I think Joshua Sinistar was implying in his comment to a post of a few days ago, perhaps the psychological ramifications of such conditioning would be neuroses wrapped in paranoia.

        But if we attack judaic biblical ideology as noxious to the human psyche, we must therefore attack Christian doctrine as well, as it is derivative of judaism. (by way of also allowing for the jews as being god’s chosen people). You will become much fucked up as well, but in a different way, if you believe that and you believe you are not in the in-group.

        Secularization of religious ideas among both some christians and some jews has been a positive force, in the ongoing changes within culture.

        Like


      • on October 13, 2015 at 7:15 pm Captain Tautological

        How much does Director Tamir Pardo pay for this [email protected]? $7.25 per hour? $0.001 per word?

        Like


      • CT – you never give your rationale for your disagreements with me.

        Like


      • You’re totally right & I wish more were saying it.

        Like


      • Arbiter is right. Funny part – Jesus said the same thing about Christians in his time – aka The Lord God feels exactly the same way. Only difference is they didn’t call ’em “Christians” back then, but rather pharisees and sadducees. So maybe instead of being a Christian, you should just follow the Lord.

        Like


      • on October 14, 2015 at 4:42 am Carlos Danger

        One needs to see the Chosen as God’s beachhead in Satan’s domain. This is warfare between higher powers and we are caught in the middle, so to speak. God is trying to save us from the forces of Satan, who still rules this planet and is running out of time. Heaven is a new concept for most of humanity. Life after death was bleak before but there was little penalty for sin in Satan`s Domain because it pleased him to anger God.

        Like


      • on October 14, 2015 at 4:53 am Carlos Danger

        The only begotten son thing is from God’s test of Abraham. He told Abraham in Genesis to prepare his first born and dearest son as a holocaust to see if he would do so. Abraham went and got started with a very heavy heart. God then told him to stop and said he had passed the test. God later takes this last step to show how much he loved man.

        Like


      • on October 14, 2015 at 5:35 am Captain Tautological

        My “rationale for my disagreements” is that that cheap J00 [email protected], Tamir Pardo, needs to start paying $12.50 an hour, or $0.002 per word, or WTFE, and get us some better quality Behavioral PsyOps specialists to spar with. Also, we like DD cups in our Mossad-ettes. And pre-Wall. Don’t be sending any skanky old post-Wall cat lady spinster Eskimo-ess has-beens over here. Phuck that sh!t.

        Like


      • Carlos Danger – for me, the biblical example you provided is another example of how inextricably tied Christian doctrine is, to Judaic doctrine. Ergo if there is something to be criticized about Judaic doctrine, that criticism, inextricably will flow to Christian doctrine as well (as the Christian is derivative of the Judaic).

        The idea of being separated from the rest of mankind in the most special of ways allows for the special snowflake attitude that courses through the more fundamentalist rabbanic discourse. The insinuation of that idea, also colors Christian discourse, often in very subtle ways.

        Both of these religious systems (in fact probably all religious systems) have developed into ideologies used to control people. In that sense these religious systems cum ideologies are subversive personhood-wise, in that the modus operandi is to remove personal agency.

        These religious systems probably did not start out with that intention. They probably started out intended to address the esoteric needs of some people, so as to allow them to better understand the abstract nature of thyself. For instance with Christianity, if the message is taken for super-personal consumption only, as an esoteric tradition, I can see it has much value as such. But that is not the way it is mostly used is it? What always happens with religious systems, is the agenda gets hijacked by those that seek power over others.

        I for one fucking detest any hint of coercion, any hint that others are using an ideological cudgel to push me around, to manipulate me.

        The fundamentalist movements within each of the religious ideologies are the worst offenders of the above mentioned dynamic. Fundamentalism is a menace.

        Like


      • CT – I am starting to see that I had you pegged wrong (with respect to your aptitude for contributing anything worthwhile). You are seriously underwhelming me.

        Like


      • No we are not liar. Only catholics are Christians and Saint Pius X and his predecessors warned us about this. Any pope or bishop or priest or any layman who is formal heretic are automatically excommunicated. They have infiltrated so well that even the hierarchy is corrupt which was foretold. 1. Demoralization 2. Destabilization 3. Crisis 4. Normalization. Natural allies to the jews? Yeah tell that to Saint Simon of Trent idiot.

        Like


      • @Balmung – I agree. Europe was warring tribes – which eventually became nations. The Catholic Church stopped the fratricide as much as possible, introduced the concepts of reason, and built Western Civ.

        @The Spirit Within – Actually that is all propaganda faked up to provide a reason for the Protestant Revolt.

        If you want to know where all that came from read Jewish Influence in Protestant Reform Movements and Plot Against the Church

        Like


    • For God’s sakes, get a real woman from Eastern Europe, settle down, go to church together like we do, and make a family like I did, then it’ll be worthwhile.

      Forget Americunts. I ditched them long ago. Your life will have meaning when you do as I described above.

      Like


    • I hear ya, brah. Once upon I time, I checked out the mormon church just for a shot at some decent wifey. Two problems:

      1) Even the mormons don’t just go give away hot moral blondies to johnny-come-lateleys.

      2) mormon doctrine is fuckin crazy even by religion standards

      Like


    • From first appearance you are doing the Enemy’s work here, number 33.

      Like


    • Right there with you, Uncle Tuna, on all accounts.

      “Welcome to earth, son. You get to be a despised slave to your inferiors until the sweet release of death.”

      Like


    • Uncle Tuna, I’m married 20+ years with a kid in college, another in grade school, and another kid “under contract.” Marriage sans supernatural intervention is more successful than a religious marriage, even with a “believing” woman. Further, the quality of women in church is no better than the quality of women outside it; the women in church are less sane and more liable to foolish fantasies.

      My religious compromises cost me many years of happy and fruitful marriage during which there were three people in my bed: her, her god, and her savior.

      When I was ready to marry, I told my social circle I was establishing a household. I was married inside a year-and-a-half. It’s counter-intuitive, but telling a woman you expect her to birth her babies really focuses her mind: nowhere else will you find a gym-rat so obsessed with total fitness, weight loss, and excellent diet. Bonus: she wants to keep you happy.

      Like


    • You’ve explained the core dichotomy every successful game practitioner and red pilled man is faced with.

      I will tell you one thing: having he truth inside you is better than settling back to the blue pill of ignorant bliss.

      The answer isn’t so easy. But perhaps a small illusion of appealing to christian heritage to in order to raise a family isn’t such a bad trade off? Like you said the majority of attractive young women these days don’t deserve a ring.

      It’s a decision you’ll have to make but I’d rather make a family with a deserving motherly women than a retched used up careerist cunt.

      Like


    • on October 14, 2015 at 4:55 am Carlos Danger

      because difficult times make great men.

      Like


  10. I’m astonished at how prophetic and insightful Ragnar Redbeard was. Tolstoy’s critique of his book is also very illuminating.

    Like


  11. Much of the feminist movement began with women’s suffrage.

    Like


    • on October 13, 2015 at 12:02 pm marcusaemilius

      Suffragettes were the quintessential entitled aristocratic Anglo bitches. There’s a reason why so many upper class Victorian men were not so secret homosexuals.

      Like


      • Indeed. Interesting too how many women were NOT on board with the suffrage movement.

        Like


      • on October 13, 2015 at 3:43 pm marcusaemilius

        It was a movement of the pushiest upper class bitches mainly, so probably didn’t have overwhelming female support. Suffragettes also pushed for “temperance” and entry into World War One (many men who would go fight couldn’t vote).

        Like


  12. There are some who seek to make common cause with the Arab and Muslim in the struggle against the Jew.

    Others side with the Jew as the civilised, cultured bulwark against a Muslim invasion.

    Finally, some would even work with the blacks against, at various times, the Jew or even the Muslim.

    The fact is, they are all against us, in one way or another. Us being the white man.

    The black is the one breaking into your home to rob and rape; the Arab is trying to blow up your home; and the Jew is at the door with a foreclosure notice.

    Like


  13. Wow is that on point.

    Like


  14. Might is Right is a great book. It seems to have had two authors – the modern preface discusses that matter, though the bulk of the text came from one of them. You could base an ideology on this book. In fact, you should. This is true spirituality, based on the logic of the eternal struggle.

    “Might is Right” rhymes in English, so that’s why it was chosen as the title, but the book isn’t really nihilistic. The phrase simply means that whoever wins, wins, and claiming moral superiority won’t help you. It also means that Whites are not evil if they fight instead of turning the other cheek. Whites are not forbidden from fighting for their race by some fantasy creature. “You shall not kill” is nonsense. Whites can and should fight, and the morality should be based on the survival of the best people, not on the “universal brotherhood of Man” talked about in Xtianity and socialism. It is good if Whites fight because it is good that we lift Life from the mud and aim for the stars, so to speak. Only through us can Life live forever. It is in fact the very opposite of nihilism. Nihilism would be to hold onto various “good” principles like turning the other cheek even if they are sure to kill us. Don’t feel guilty for wanting your people to survive.

    Like


    • From Might is Right, explaining that if your people shall survive it must fight and kill, as has happened throughout history:

      The Philosophy of Power and the Logic of Today

      Might was right when Caesar bled upon the stones of Rome
      And might was right when Genghis led his hordes o’er Danube’s foam
      And might was right when German troops poured down through Paris way
      It’s the gospel of the ancient world and the logic of today

      Behind all kings and presidents, all government and law
      Are army corps and canoneers to hold the world in awe
      And sword-strong races own the earth and ride the conqueror’s car
      For liberty has never been won except by deeds of war

      What are the lords of hoarded gold, the silent Semite rings
      What are the plunder pirates, high pontiffs, priests and kings?
      What are they but bold master minds, best fitted for the fray
      Who comprehend and vanquish by the logic of today

      Cain’s knotted club is scepter still, all “Rights of Man” are fraud
      Christ’s ethics are for creeping things, true manhood smiles at God
      For might is right when empires sink in storms of steel and flame
      And it is right when weakling breeds are hunted down like game

      Then what’s the use of dreaming dreams, that each shall get his own
      By forceless votes of meek-eyed thralls, who blindly sweat and moan?
      A pox is on their cankered brains, their very bones decay
      Go! Trace your fate in the iron game, is the logic of today

      The strong must ever rule the weak, is grim primordial law
      On earth’s broad racial threshing floor, the meek are beaten straw
      Then ride to power o’er foemen’s neck, let nothing bar your way
      If you are fit you’ll rule and reign, is the logic of today

      You must prove you’re right by deeds of might, of splendor and renown
      If need be march through flames of hell to dash opponents down
      If need be, die on scaffold high in the morning’s misty gray
      For liberty or death is still the logic of today

      Might was right when Gideon led the “chosen” tribes of old
      And it was right when Titus burnt their temple roofed with gold
      And might was right from Bunker’s Hill, to far Manilla Bay
      By land and flood it’s writ in blood, the gospel of today

      “Put not your trust in princes,” is a saying old and true
      “Put not your hope in governments,” translateth it anew
      All books of law and golden rules are fashioned to betray
      The survival of the fittest is the gospel of today

      Might was right when Carthage flames lit up the Punic foam
      And when the naked steel of Gaul weighed down the spoils of Rome
      And Might was Right when Richmond fell, and at Thermopylae
      It’s the logic of the ancient world and the gospel of today

      When pendant suns in millions swing around this whirling earth
      It’s might, it’s force that holds the brakes and steers through death and birth
      Force governs all organic life, inspires right and wrong
      It’s nature’s plan to weed out man and test who are the strong!

      Like


      • More from Might is Right:

        Some slay with spear and some with sword
        Some have no battle plan
        Some stab with venom’s subtle word
        Each does the best he can
        And each man gets what he can win
        Great wealth, great love or fame
        The conqueror gets his just reward
        The conquered gets his shame

        The weak ones wear a crown of thorns
        Or bleat in living hell
        The strong man crowns himself with gold
        And all the world is well
        And each man gains what others lose
        No use to reason why
        Each plants his heel on fallen foes
        By Love, or Law, or Lie

        Like


      • Boldly Stand Erect

        Jewish books are for the Jews
        And Jew Messiahs, too
        But if you’re not of Jewish blood
        How can they be for you?

        To make an idol of a book
        Is poison for the brain
        A dying God upon a cross
        Is reason gone insane

        Beware of all the holy books
        And all the creeds and schools
        And every law that man has made
        And all the golden rules

        “Laws” and “rules” imposed on you
        From days of old renown
        Are not intended for your good
        But for your crushing down

        Then dare to rend the chains that bind
        And to yourself be true
        Dare to liberate your mind
        From all things, old and new

        Always think your own thought
        All other thoughts reject
        Learn to use your own brain
        And boldly stand erect!

        Like


      • http://www.thisblogisdangerous.com/we-do-not-debate-with-the-left/

        “We do not debate with the left. They want to entangle us in circular arguments. We do not do what they want. We will not debate them out of existence. We will physically remove them from our society.

        Debating, pleading, bargaining and protesting are inherently feminine, leftist and come from a position of weakness. We are not the weak, they are. We are the strong. We do what we want and they will bend to our will or be destroyed.

        The strong have no need for debate. The strong do not seek approval for their actions, they just act.

        Merely by engaging in debate one lowers oneself to the leftist position of weakness. By debating you project the image that you are not strong enough to enforce your will upon your enemies. We are the strong. The only conversation we will have with the left will be ultimatums.

        The time you spend arguing with leftists is wasted. Leftists are weak and ugly people who need the crutch of big, progressive government. They love arguing, and the attention and feeling of moral superiority it grants them. We shall no longer give them what they want. Withdrawing from pointless arguments with leftists serves two purposes. Firstly, it frees up time we can use to focus on improving ourselves. Secondly, the leftists’ need for debate, attention and moral superiority will cause them to bicker amongst themselves.

        Imagine if suddenly, overnight, the left had nobody to talk to. Complete radio silence. Imagine that they were left screaming into the void, and how soon it would be before the Muslims turn on the gays and the blacks turned on the feminists. And us, without their whining and distractions, we are out there growing stronger.

        Without us to concentrate on, the left will eat itself and then we will physically remove whatever is left of them from our society.

        The left have suppressed and criminalised dissent and honest debate. They have perverted the use of language with political correctness and the law to make reasoning with them impossible. They use the law to penalise objectionable but free speech and those who question them and their agenda. They claim to be peaceful, but demand the government use violence to injure, imprison and destroy the livelihoods of those who oppose them. Their idea of conversation is a one way re-education. By making debate pointless and protest impossible they have dug their own graves. When violence comes to them it will be entirely their fault.”

        Like


  15. Gotta say for no reason in particular that this is why I come here, in roughly this order:

    – CH’s revolutionary writing
    – The intelligence and knowledge of several commenters
    – Greg Eliot’s wit in particilar
    – Captain’s O’s comments
    – Whorefinder’s gossamer prose on the tender joys of consensual lovemaking

    [CH: gasbuttox and the african megafauna guy never fail to crack me up. it must be the wascally ute in me.]

    Like


    • That pretty much sums it all up.

      Like


    • I always laugh out loud when CO writes “professorette”.

      In fact I stifled a laugh just typing this now.

      Like


    • Anyone notice that Dalrock banning GBFM caused him to spaz out about it for a week and now he’s nowhere to be found?

      Took that kinda hard for a supposed DGAF badass….lol

      Like


      • on October 13, 2015 at 2:17 pm mendozatorres

        GBFM used to be more of a regular when he had his blog before that got banned. After that, he wasn’t as frequent, but would still offer his point of view in between long breaks.

        Don’t know why he was banned from Dalrock, but GBFM’s still lurking at Le Chateau.

        Like


      • on October 13, 2015 at 4:33 pm Captain Tautological

        Something obviously changed in GBFM’s life – my feeling was that maybe he became a Father for the first time? Something important like that, which obviously required a whole lot of his energy and attention.

        Like


      • Dalrock seems to spin in circles about “getting” GBFM(TM) and then not-getting him. da GBFM(TM) can hardly be blamed for taking amiss these moodswings of the Dalrock ban-hammer: especially when you consider longstanding members of the Dalrock ecosystem like that ol’ frankfarter whatshisnut, who I assume remains unmolested despite his tireless See No Cultural Marxism screeds.

        Anyhoo, da GBFM(TM) is, to paraphrase Whit Stillman’s “Barcelona”, “a complex and in many ways a dangerous man”– and I doubt he is ‘nowhere to be found.’

        Where three of you are gathered in his name, there will he be also. lzlzolzlzolz

        Like


    • – Greg Eliot’s wit in particilar

      Whaddya mean funny?

      What, am I, like a clown? I amuse you… I’m here to f#ckin’ amuse you?

      How the f#ck am I funny?

      /jes;’ playin’, bro… I relish the compliment. 😉

      Like


    • Hear hear.

      Like


  16. This one’s for you Arbiter. Get right with God.

    Like


  17. This from 1929. It goes way back in popular culture as well.

    Like


    • on October 13, 2015 at 2:18 pm mendozatorres

      Eddie Cantor!? Wow, that’s some good stuff right there.

      Watch Chuck Workman’s Precious Images movie montage. Don’t know how someone noticed Eddie in there, cause it’s damn near a split second he appears. Looks to be the same outfit as above.

      Like


  18. Schopenhauer’s trenchant, crisply expressed and profoundly true views on women should be obligatory study for every male on the cusp of manhood.

    http://www.theabsolute.net/misogyny/onwomen.html

    Schoprnhauer: the ultimate red-piller. Noone before or since has looked at life so directly in the face and lived to write the tale.

    Like


  19. How does an education hurt a woman’s ability to be a good mother?

    Honest question

    Like


    • grosso modo ‘education’ is part of the Enemy’s path for woman to defy man.

      Like


    • on October 13, 2015 at 2:22 pm mendozatorres

      It depends on the education. Is it education or indoctrination to which she has been subjected?

      Like


    • Because a women that has an education, usually wants to share that knowledge, whether right or wrong. They cease to listen when they “know” a thing or two. Rare, a woman with intellect, uses it to question herself and not others.

      Like


  20. Feminism is a logical and economic outgrowth of the philosophy of individual rights.

    Now, if one believes the purpose of governance ought to be to perpetuate a stable human society indefinitely into the future, then one has already got the solution to the problem: the law of Moses, complete with death for cads, homosexuals, atheists, adulterers, and rapists.

    The reasons for those consequences end up being economic in nature.

    Individual rights didn’t play much, if any, of a role in that system of governance, which was predicated on obligation and duty and roles.

    Such a society, of course, must be opt-in, as was ancient Israel. And when you agree to the penalties, it is just to give you what you asked for.

    But I think in the end cads will be cads, despite the damage it does to humanity. After all, if you ain’t the alpha, you’re kissing someone’s ass and getting sloppy seconds, amirite?

    Like


    • “…the law of Moses, complete with death for …atheists…”

      Reference the chapter and verse where the death penalty is prescribed.

      Like


      • Deuteronomy 13:6-10

        https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deu%2013:6-10&version=NIV

        I can’t speak, myself, to any specific call against “Atheism”, but the penalty for turning away from the Lord was death.

        Like


      • That would be idolatry, that is, worshipping another deity. Specifically, the death penalty requires worship of another deity.

        Like


      • One is called the sin of the Holy Ghost- to reject God’s mercy with full will and understanding of the consequences. Most of you atheists are guilty of this sin. This one is like being queer, it pisses God off really badly.

        Like


      • The demons believe and tremble. I suggest you carefully read the end of Mark, chapter 3, to discern what’s really happening between the religious folks come from Jerusalem to accuse Jesus of being in league with the devils he casts out of men, and how Jesus defines his siblings. It’s not by belief. And the Holy Spirit isn’t “God’s mercy.” Hint: sin, not judgement, creates damnation. What do we discuss here at the Chateau that saves us from damnation, and what leads others to damnation. For what is the shiv? Take a look at the top of the page, at the title. “Where pretty lies perish.”

        You blaspheme Truth, which is the Holy Spirit about which Jesus spoke.

        Pay attention to the other parables: who covers a lamp? Why is so much given to those who already have much, and from those who have nothing, even more is taken? Truth, truth, truth: this is the message of Jesus. Open your eyes and see. If you have ears, hear.

        Repent and be saved.

        Like


      • Death is also the penalty for even one act of homosex.

        Leviticus 20:13

        13 “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.”

        It is a proven fact, therefore, that modern “Jews” and “Christians” who champion gay and tranny rights are not real Jews or Christians, or at least they are not following their own Holy Books. (Jews are a rat-like race, no matter what.)

        Like


      • The law against lesbians is absent.

        Like


    • Much of the Draconian nature of OT laws have to do with trying to keep the tribes of Israel alive and viable in a harsh environment where they were constantly outnumbered.

      Tribes in those circumstances cannot survive internal strife amongst themselves and/or mixing overmuch with outside influences, both genetically and culturally.

      Keep this in mind when you speak of the OT and the seemingly “barbaric” nature of God’s law at the time.

      And remember, we ourselves used to hang a man for horse thievery… because at the time, if you took a man’s horse, your probably left him alone in the wilderness (a probably death sentence) and/or severely damaged his ability to run his farm and feed his family.

      Like


      • It’s simpler than that.

        A. The law is THE solution to perpetuating a stable human society into the indefinite future. Any change inevitably led to the failure and death of that stable society.

        B. The categories visited with death undermined the long-term reproductive strategy of humanity – necessary for the survival and perpetuation of any society – or have intrinsically high time preference and thus can never be trusted in any function related to the administration of the law due to a penchant to pervert the law for personal aggrandizement.

        It’s all perfectly rational once one recognizes the intended goal was to perpetuate a stable human society into the future forever, given humans as they are.

        Like


    • Feminism has never been about individual rights. If it were it would not only be tolerable but commendable. Individual rights mean individual responsibilities. And it is the responsibilities side that feminism has never been too keen on adopting.

      Like


    • The idea against adultry was to protect the small man against the depridations of the powerful man.

      Like


  21. on October 13, 2015 at 2:58 pm elmer t. jones

    Like


  22. I think that the extreme expressive individualism promoted by “Might is Right” has in fact been promoted by the zhid and played a large role in our downfall. In fact, many of the commenters here, and the Heartiste himself/themselves, have noted numerous times how media sponsored feminism has created an environment in which cads enjoy great sexual reward to the detriment not only of the beta providers but to social cohesion and white reproduction as a whole.

    It might be good for me or for you to break all the rules, but it isn’t good for us if too many of us do that. We aren’t all Alexanders or Ghengis Khans or even Arnold Schwarzeneggers. Moreover, while extreme individualism might be good for some men, it is a disaster for nearly all women–again, I’m not saying anything new here. But I’d say it’s better for women to be in church on Sunday morning than in a club on Saturday night. Maybe not better for me every time, but better for us all as a whole.

    I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding of darwinism among many of the people who advocate things like “Might is Right.” The “fittest” are not necessarily the most brutal and ‘alpha’ but simply those who can propagate the most in a given environment. For the time being, the hyperreligious Africans and Arabs are more fit than the irreligious whites. Yet, many of you want to continue to blame our historical religion.

    Is it true that the churches have been infiltrated and serve our enemies. Yes, though not completely. But I posit to you that that is more a consequence of the susceptibility of any hierarchical organization to infiltration by those who control money and information. If the Catholic Church (I’m not Catholic, btw) had news papers as influential as the Boston Globe and the NY Times, and if the Vatican bank had Goldman’s reach, they wouldn’t be cowed so easily into multiculturalism. Its informative how a massive church sex scandal in Ireland conveniently preceded legalization of gay marriage there.

    The truth is that we must organize and collaborate. The early church was successful precisely because it was able to do that. It survived by providing common defense, healthcare, and food for its adherents. It was even more successful once elites started converting. I think this is a good starting place for us, too. All the stuff that some of you mock–love one another, don’t covet, etc.,–are actually every eugenic when practiced within an in-group of believers.

    Like


  23. Does using “zhid” result in automatic blocking of comments?

    Like


  24. Just read that rapper T.I. said he wouldn’t vote for a woman for president because they make rash emotional decisions and then later act like they weren’t responsible for their actions (my paraphrase). He was promptly slapped by the horrified media machine and apologized.

    Like


  25. CH: You neglected important portions of the text.

    “Then it cometh to pass (as in all ages of connubial decadence) “no man knoweth his own father.” Is not that the practical tendency of the times? Again, is that ‘tendency’ itself not the horrible result of State-Paternalism — of majority-box dictation — of Statecraft and <<>>? The <<>> lives by the functional emotionalism of women. Thus the Individual wanes and the State grows more and more. In natural society, every woman’s husband is to her, both <<>> and king. When the baleful shadow of politics and <<>>, looms over the marriage bed, dreadful days are at hand.”

    “When a higher type allies itself by marriage with a lower, it paves the way for its own ultimate degeneracy. When Spartans and Athenians mixed themselves with imported Asiatic and Egyptian slaves, their downfall was foretold; and when <<>> became the motto of <<>> Italy; Latins, Asiatics, and Negroes miscegenated, evolving the modern ‘Dago’ — who slaves for the descendents of the men his ancestors conquered.”

    “Nature is saturated through and through, with the chemic potency of strife and sexualism. All the world is male and female. The <<>> is the only hermaphrodite.”

    “Military renown is now, and ever has been, the virtue of the mightiest animals. Self-abnegation is the thesis of the slave. <<>> is functional derangement of the nerve centres — a madness — a disease.

    “A national <<>> has never been known to materialize, in the guise of a feeble mendicant — an humble petitioner: but rather in the form of a mighty man-hunter, a destroyer of tribal ravagers — a man who saith to his disciples ‘come on!’ not ‘go forth!’ The Emancipator is heard of at first, with secret delight, and some misgivings; but afterwards when better understood, he comes on a war-horse with steel by his side; amid the roll of saluting cannon, the throb of triumphal drums, the fierce blare of twisted-bugles, and the ringing huzzas of the People he has enriched by the exploitation of their foes — for all-the-world loves a fighter; especially its sisters, its cousins, and its aunts. Liberators never arrive from <<>>. No! No! — that is the ideal of — <<>>.”

    Heed me, men. Christianity is killing you.

    Like


  26. I had a much longer post that disappeared into the ether, but paraphrased:

    The zhid have used the expressive individualism advocated by “Might is Right” to tear us apart. Sorry to break it to you, while we can all be alphas in our own lives, we can’t all be actual alphas–i.e., Alexander needs phalanxes or he isn’t Alexander.

    The churches, rather than fighting this, have been infiltrated and sold their souls to proverbial Caesar (actual Shmuley). It isn’t Christian doctrine that makes them susceptible, it is hierarchy and organization. They are outgunned in the media and in money by the zhid. Think Soros bribing evangelicals to support immigration of Muslims or the Catholic Church slammed with massive sex (and Magdalene Laundry) scandals to prepare the country for immigration ( http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/apr/08/abortion-refusal-death-ireland-hindu-woman this was very much narrated as the old Catholic Ireland murdering wonderful diversity ) and same sex marriage.

    Christian morality IS eugenic within our in-group, and was for centuries. Stew on that for a little while.

    Like


    • on October 14, 2015 at 11:39 am Franz Ferdinand's Jugular

      So I guess the liberte, egalite, fraternite, OU LA MORT really does work for ya’ll.

      Like


      • I’m not sure how you got that from what I wrote.

        1) I do want liberty, but most people don’t know what to do with absolute freedom. It isn’t as if people who lived their lives within the constraints of organized religion never accomplished anything. Free verse poetry can be great–I love TS Eliot and Ezra Pound–But I’m not sure it has ever reached the heights of sonnets, constrained in form though they might be. Life is the same way.

        2) Equality is I something I believe in when men stand before God. But we all know that God didn’t distribute His gifts equitably among men. What this amounts to is that I believe in rights, though mostly with respect to laws that apply to all men. And certainly not equality of races or even attributes among individuals. You and I are equal in that our lives both have meaning and we can both transcend our human condition to reach for God. But just because the Emperor and the farmer and equal before God doesn’t mean that the farmer enjoys the Emperors prerogatives. Women can’t be priests. Men can’t be mothers (in today’s society that is apparently something that needs to be said).

        3. Fraternity is something the sons of Europa could use a bit more of, don’t you think? Instead, I see a lot of sniping between Protestants and Catholics, Celts and Anglo-Saxons, Germanics and Slavs, Nordics and Greeks/Southern Italians/Spaniards…. Is that really in our best interest? Competition can bring out the best in us and to a certain extent it is healthy, but there comes a point when salve our pride and work together–hopefully following the best of us. Read about how the Byzantines and the Bulgarians were fighting relentlessly over the port of Messembria as the Turks were literally enslaving them both. Or how the Byzantine nobles hated each other so much that they actually brought in Turkish mercenaries to the Balkans just to depose a hated rival (or indeed how the Doukas clan abandoned the emperor at Manzikert simply to humiliate him and this allowed the Turks into the Empire to begin with). The Visigothic nobles behaved much the same in Spain.

        If we don’t have brotherhood, we WILL have death, whether we want it or not.

        Like


  27. Me: “so why college?”
    Girl: “to get a good job.”
    Me: “…….breakup time.”
    Girl: “raaaaape!”

    From my youth to this day, my reason for education is to support my family. To hell if i hand over my hard work, my pearls, to these masses of women who chose careerism over family. No remorse as the walk out, gnashing their teeth as they realize their deception has failed.

    Like


  28. Might is Right is one of the greatest books ever written. Ragnar Redbeard (Arthur Desmond) has some great quotes. Some of my favorites:

    “Nothing so lowers a lover in a virile maiden’s estimation, than for him to be ‘whipped’ in a personal encounter with a rival.”

    “Women have ever been the stumbling block and betrayers of ambition.”

    “Sociology is a biological problem and Nations are herds of cattle.”

    Like


  29. on October 14, 2015 at 5:27 am Miss Westerner

    This further buttresses the need for feminism.

    Over time, feminism has gained a negative label, and it’s mostly due to ignorance. It is as if society makes out self-proclaimed feminists to be whining, complaining women who hate men. There is generally a lot of ignorance regarding the feminist cause, and feminism is misrepresented by common stereotypes such ugly, hostile and anti-family. When I tell others that I’m a feminist, I’m often met with remarks such as “why do you want to undermine men?” Feminism isn’t about destroying men – it’s about eliminating patriarchy and sexism.

    Notwithstanding the fact that this article is highly extoled by some individuals, it only provides more proof that women have always been oppressed and expected to be have their contributions to society relegated to domestic chores and child rearing. Around the same time, there were a few females who managed, despite being constantly under the choke of oppression, to hold their own in a male-dominated world and left a legacy. Read for instance the account on Mary Margarett O’ Reilly from wikipedia:

    Mary Margaret O’Reilly (1865–1949) was the Assistant Director of the United States Bureau of the Mint. One of the highest-ranking female civil servants of her time, the “sweetheart of the Treasury” often served as the Mint’s acting director in the absence of the director from 1916 until 1924, when she was formally made assistant director. O’Reilly lived her early life in Massachusetts. She left school around age 14 to help support her widowed mother and her siblings, and worked in Worcester for twenty years as a clerk. In 1904, O’Reilly succeeded in gaining a position at the Mint Bureau. Her rapid rise in the hierarchy was unusual for a woman at that time, and with many of the directors under whom she served having little knowledge of or interest in the bureau’s operations, the task of running the Mint often fell to her. Beginning in 1933, O’Reilly served under her first female director, Nellie Tayloe Ross, and soon forged a strong bond with her. O’Reilly was so indispensable to the bureau’s operations that President Franklin Delano Roosevelt postponed her retirement, scheduled for 1935, to 1938

    Like


    • mediocre debater, and mediocre sandwich maker.

      work on strength, not weakness

      Like


    • on October 14, 2015 at 1:40 pm Carlos Danger

      Get back to the kitchen and tend to your Family. Your movement is the destruction of our civilization. No matter how you rationalize it. Your movement is evil and intended to destroy our civilization. You are nothing more than useful idiots for a cabal of Jewish billionaires who seek to enslave us all and destroy the Family. Get thee to a nunnery, whore.

      Like


    • Feminism has earned it’s label over a hundred and sixty years plus starting at the very beginning.

      Like


  30. Fat (on BigAgro corn syrup), drunk (on Big Gov promises) and stupid (-ly parroting Encorpera’s gogrrl nonsense) is no way to go through life, Miss.

    Like


  31. “When a higher type allies itself by marriage with a lower, it paves the way for its own ultimate degeneracy.”

    That’s looking at you, Jabe!

    Like


  32. on October 15, 2015 at 5:17 am Edenist whackjob

    “There should be a designation for Realtalk™ that reaches beyond discomfiting truths to something even more bowel-shaking. Scrotalk™?”

    Cthulhutalk

    Like


  33. …when “Equality” became the motto of Christian Italy; Latins, Asiatics, and Negroes miscegenated, evolving the modern ‘Dago’

    Why do you keep posting outdated shit like this? It’s FALSE–refuted by genetic and anthropological evidence:

    http://italianthro.altervista.org/italians.html

    Fucking asshole

    Like