Beating Up White Kids and Filming It
Despite the sickly-sweet rainbow-colored lollipops they’ve been trying to sell us for generations now, racial violence will be a factor in any multiracial society — especially when that multiracial society endlessly posits these groups as warring tribes with unsettled historical grievances. Until everyone decides to assimilate and breed into one indistinguishably cross-blurred and hybridized mess — i.e., never — there will be racial conflict and racial hierarchies, with much of the pecking order decided by who controls street violence. And regardless of what the movies and newscasters might lead you to believe, I sense that most whites in America and Europe are painfully aware that white people do not control the streets.
While the act of filming someone being humiliated, tortured, and brutalized may seem passive, it’s hard to interpret the act of posting the video online as anything but triumphantly aggressive cultural terrorism, the racial equivalent of a big-game hunter posing for a photo with their rifle next to the elephant they just slaughtered.
And while posting evidence of criminal behavior — or your complicity in criminal behavior — may seem foolhardy due to the concept of self-incrimination, this is assuming that you live under a regime dedicated to sending a message that you shouldn’t humiliate, torture, and brutalize white people for being white.
I write a lot about interracial violence, especially the reigning presumption that when a white person gets the upper hand in any scuffle with a non-white, their motivation is presumed to be racial hatred, whereas modern retardo-orthodoxy dictates that it’s theoretically impossible for non-whites to be racist against whites, even if they’re shouting anti-white slurs while pummeling them.
Although over the past decade or so I’ve seen, linked to, and written about scads of non-white-on-white attacks, all of them captured and preserved forever on video, I’m drawing blanks trying to recall even a single instance of even one white, much less a group of them, physically assaulting and verbally demeaning a non-white while filming it and then posting it online. And this is over the course of years poring over the subject. I’m not saying such a tape doesn’t exist, only that it would be a statistical anomaly. Not only wouldn’t it “support the narrative,” as the overused term states it — it wouldn’t reflect the overall pattern of racial violence in modern America and Europe.
This week, I’m chagrined to say, brings three more stories of non-whites brutalizing white people as an accomplice filmed it all and then posted the results online for all the world to see and take heed.
In Germany — where last year a group of dark-haired girls filmed themselves tormenting a bawling white German girl as they “beat the victim, set her hair on fire, and put out cigarettes on her face” — footage recently emerged of “a group of Turkish-speaking students tortur[ing] a 12-year-old victim, with the film showing the victim repeatedly beaten, forced to kneel, and verbally insulted”:
The shots show the perpetrators putting the victim, Patrick, in a state of complete fear, pulling his hair, punching him, and asking to beg forgiveness. Patrick’s face is covered in red marks and apparent blood where he was punched and hit.
The Turkish youth scream “Fuck off!” in Turkish during the video when they finally let their victim go.
There were allegedly five boys involved, with three watching on and one filming. One girl was reportedly also present.
Bild reports that the video was already filmed in February, but a police investigation for assault and torture has already been closed, with the police saying their hands are tied.
“The (…) students are 12-year-old children who are not yet of criminal responsibility according to the law,” said a police spokesperson.
Turkish youth immigrants beat, choke and humiliate a 12-year-old German boy
Because the attackers are under the age of 17, they can’t be prosecuted under the law.
WHY DO IMMIGRANTS DO THIS:
– because they hate us,
– because they know that our children are not violent pic.twitter.com/10WArOUVeT— Klaus Arminius (@Klaus_Arminius) March 12, 2024
All of the students involved in the fracas still attend the same school.
At the Eagle Ridge Middle School in the tiny town of Savage, Minnesota — which as of 2010 was 76% white and only 9% black — some enterprising voyeur filmed a white child being backed up against a locker and then swung at repeatedly by several black students as girls squeal in delight. Ever the beacon of objectivity, CBS News referred to the incident as a “fight,” despite the fact that the white student doesn’t say a word or throw a punch in the video.
At a St. Patrick’s Day Parade in South Boston — known locally as “Southie” and an area which to me conjures images of scrappy and hard-drinking Celts who defend their turf — another anonymous videographer recorded what appear to my Irish eyes as a pair of black yoofs roughing up a white male, who is already on the ground as the video begins, and then shoving and kicking him down a hill until he lands face-first on a steel fence post, which prompts an impressed “OOOOH!” out of an onlooker. The white victim’s assailants continue to taunt and spit on him as he rolls around on the concrete for a moment, but the most disgusting spectacle was the skinny little white kid who walks up to the sight a of beaten and vanquished co-ethnic, only to point his finger and excitedly jump up and down in mockery.
I looked for “news” stories on this video of a “fight” that occurred during the St. Patrick’s Day parade in South Boston (Southie) but couldn’t find any that mention it. Instead, they all read like the one linked below and show an image of a gun found and people pushing over a… pic.twitter.com/pMnglENnH0
— Mrgunsngear (@Mrgunsngear) March 21, 2024
The Boston Police Department shared images of the three criminal suspects, two of whom are black and the other a white male wearing a Celtics jersey. I’ve watched the video again and again, and the white kid in the Celtics shirt isn’t anywhere near the victim. To my biased eyes, this looks like strictly a black-on-white attack, but . . . you know . . . “the narrative” and all.
White Christian Pastor Vows to Tell the Harsh Truth about White People to His Two-Year-Old Son
The Reverend Eric Rucker is an Episcopalian minister in Des Moines who resembles a malnourished, bespectacled sheep who had most of the wool shorn off his forehead, face, and neck.
He recently published an op-ed in the Des Moines Register titled “I’m a Christian pastor. I won’t lie to my son about our history and white heritage.”:
My 2-year-old is beginning to ask all kinds of questions. And I’ve begun to wonder what I will share with him about his family’s heritage. . . .
I grew up with the implicit knowledge that I’m “white.” But “white” is not an ethnic group. Ta-Nehisi Coates observes that I am from “people who believe themselves to be white.” This phrase uncovers the truth that “white” is an idea created by people in power to maintain dominance. Thus who qualifies as “white” is continually shifting.
As I cut through the facade of generic “whiteness” to learn about my history, I discovered that my ancestors arrived on this continent in 1690 and founded Ruckersville, Virginia. I also found evidence that we “owned” enslaved African people. . . .
I’m a Christian pastor. In our religion we are given a road map for how to work with our community’s transgressions. It’s called “repentance,” and it’s what Jesus called everyone to — especially those who wield racial or political power. The first step in repentance is telling the truth. . . .
I am going to tell my son about our whole family history. I am going to teach him that he can be grateful for the sacrifices of his forbears while also having the courage to reckon with our crimes against African and Indigenous people.
I am going to help him understand how he still benefits from advantages that were gained because of racism, past and present.
Mind you, his son is two years old. What the hell kind of racially-themed questions is he asking Pops at that age, and whose fault is that? As I see it, this is a passive form of child abuse: inflicting unearned guilt while softening up his spawn against a statistically violent cohort who are already unjustifiably resentful.
I’ve said for many years, to much wailing and gnashing of teeth, that both wokeness and Christianity hinge on the very concept of guilt: defining it, assigning it, and punishing it while offering a Magical Salvation Loophole to those who slavishly parrot the Gospel. And for every “based” white Christian who thinks their religion is just the Hail Mary pass that will save the white race, there are at least a thousand Eric Ruckers.
Content Creator Who Made “Parody Videos of Disney Songs” During Alt Right’s Heyday Explains “Why I’m No Longer a White Nationalist”
Over the past year or so I’ve noticed a burgeoning literary micro-niche that makes me highly uncomfortable: nostalgic reminiscences of the Alt Right’s glory days. It isn’t that I thought anything was wrong with the now-tarnished brand “Alt Right” per se — certainly not the unabashed racism and irreverence. It’s that nostalgia in general makes me uncomfortable.
“Walt Bismarck” is the pseudonymous handle of a 30-year-old who describes himself as a primary mover-and-shaker in the vintage Alt Right’s time in the sun from around 2015-2017, back with all the legendary media buzz and even a shout-out from Hillary Clinton when she was running for president. Back before . . . you know . . . Charlottesville.
His screen name appears to be a portmanteau of Walt Disney — whose monstrously successful legacy company’s songs he used to lampoon — and the martially-minded Teutonic icon Otto von Bismarck. Back in “those days,” he went by another pseudonym, the rather awkward “Uncuck the Right.” His video “We Didn’t Start the Movement” changes the lyrics to a Billy Joel song rather than a Disney tune. It also features Jared Taylor singing and playing the saxophone, as well as a very brief mention of me.
But now the shadowy Mr. Bismarck, writing from a Substack account, has issued a pair of essays declaring before God and man that even though he is not in any way disavowing or morally distancing himself from his Alt Right past, he’s spreading his wings and branching out. (Warning: He uses the word “Faustian” a lot, refuses to blame Jews for much, and blames boomers for everything.)
In January’s “How the Alt Right Won,” he says that the movement’s major goal — shifting the Overton window so that it became “politically viable to openly discuss the interests of white people in mainstream politics, in the same way black people or Jewish people discuss their collective interests” — was a fait accompli and a “huge victory” at that. He also counsels everyone to stop worrying about Da Jews:
Most young secular right wing Jews these days are pro-White [sic] and don’t treat being ethnically Jewish as that different from being, say, Italian.
It’s still the case that the coalitional politics surrounding the Gaza War have forced American Jews to choose between allying with right wing Whites [sic] on one hand and abandoning their ethnic interests to become deracinated globalists on the other. . . .
Bismarck writes that rather than owning the Jews, he’d much rather focus on “crushing the gerontocracy.”
In “Why I’m no longer a White Nationalist” from March 6, he reiterates that like his previous article, this is in no way a plea for mercy or an attempt to rehabilitate his image:
I’ve stopped calling myself a White Nationalist (WN). Do not mistake this for a disavowal of my past or some kind of groveling apology. As expressed in my retrospective on the Alt Right, I’m not in the least bit ashamed of anything I did in 2015-2018 while I was active in the movement. . . . I am incredibly proud to have been one of these young men. Years later I still consider my activism during this period the crowning achievement of my life. . . . I’ve also stopped identifying “White People” or even “White Americans” as my primary ingroup.
He says that rather than race, he’s “most worried” about things such as the dollar’s collapse, online “dopamine traps” such as TikTok and gambling apps, and “a selfish and unfettered gerontocracy that won’t tolerate any cuts to senior benefits”:
I predict that politics will continue to depolarize around race and repolarize along gender, age, religion, class, and marital status. . . .
In my opinion the only people who can lead us out of this epistemic jungle are mischievous contrarians who love throwing grenades into circlejerks — guys like the Richards Hanania and Spencer, or even Matt Yglesias and Nate Silver. It is this particular personality type — the high openness, low agreeableness, boundary-pushing intellectual who trades in hot takes and enjoys picking fights with “their side” — that I most identify with and have the greatest loyalty to. . . .
I implore the fashy goys of 2015 to set the fourteen words aside for now and instead take a serious look at banning TikTok / gambling apps / widespread porn, preserving the global dollar, and reforming Social Security. . . . Put down the tiki torch and come help me politically castrate septuagenarians and save your kids’ dopamine receptors.
Did you get that? It’s not the Jews — it’s the boomers. Discuss.
The%20Worst%20Week%20Yet%3A%0AMarch%2017-23%2C%202024%0A
Share
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate at least $10/month or $120/year.
- Donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Everyone else will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days. Naturally, we do not grant permission to other websites to repost paywall content before 30 days have passed.
- Paywall member comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Paywall members have the option of editing their comments.
- Paywall members get an Badge badge on their comments.
- Paywall members can “like” comments.
- Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, please visit our redesigned Paywall page.
Related
-
The Worst Week Yet: April 21-27, 2024
-
Nowej Prawicy przeciw Starej Prawicy Rozdział 2: Hegemonia
-
Will There Be an Optics War II?
-
Race Recap
-
The Nigga They Are, The Hard “R” They Fall
-
Counter-Currents Radio Podcast No. 582: When Did You First Notice the Problems of Multiculturalism?
-
The Worst Week Yet: April 7-13, 2024
-
The Woman-Punching MAGAts of Manhattan
52 comments
The words of “Walt Bismarck” read similarly to the words I’ve read from a lot of “former” White Nationalists. There’s rarely an attempt to attack the ideas presented by the movement and its subgroups directly. Rather, they take a vague, self-help styled outlook which attempts to minimize the concerns of White Nationalists rather than actually address them.
This kind of rhetoric seems to be most common among middle and upper class “former” WNs. And I have a feeling that’s because they can economically insulate themselves from the worst aspects of diversity and modernity if it comes down to it. What was a serious political struggle for many was just a hobby for them.
Yeah, the brave anonymous “Walt” goes out of his way to demean “unstable white trash” as a key problem for “the movement.” Without a trace of discernible irony, he implies part of the reason he distanced himself was that he’d found financial security. But I thought it was boomers who put selfish comfort above loftier goals? These Edgy Alex Keaton types never really risked anything and never actually had to deal with the downsides of forced diversity. At times it all seemed to be little more than an abstract video game for them. And now they’ll flay us with tedious lifetime “war” remembrances from people who literally never dodged a bullet.
Just read the Walt Bismarck article. His Disney parodies were well done. Sorry to hear about his new positions, and I think his experience shows what can happen when one links themself to, or worships, certain political commentators and always adopts whatever the latest groupthink or trend in the movement is. One year it’s “rah-rah Russia is great,” another it’s “based Muslims are cool,” another it’s, “race realism is so passé,” another it’s, “so you’re just some kind of racist liberal if you don’t hate women and don’t want gays to face capital punishment? maybe whites aren’t worth saving after all if they’re not like those heroic taliban heroes,” another year it’s, “Christ is King; better jump on this bandwagon because this is what we’re doing now,” and so on.
How hard is it to appreciate the legacy your ancestors left you, to want your people to be able to advocate for their group interests and to not just survive but prosper and have something wonderful to look forward to. It doesn’t have to be more complicated than that. It’s the most natural and healthy thing to feel and to maintain. All the stupid movement drama nonsense and various trends and differing strains of opinions about this or that don’t change the truth of that.
Also, I remember Bismarck used to shout out (praise) people like Richard Spencer a lot in his videos. He did that a lot. As a side note, I just want to say that I never liked Richard Spencer. He is someone who loves the sound of his own voice and constantly put down people who sacrificed to support him and tried to ally with him.
You can fuck up on a lot of different things, but race realism is never passé!
This stuff is too depressing to watch. I know normies should see it but it really can’t be healthy to regularly look at this material once you already know the facts.
“Did you get that? It’s not the Jews — it’s the boomers. Discuss.” We’ve many, many enemies and NGO’s to overcome but the absolute, immediate threat to our progress and self determination and anything resembling parity is the liberal white. Given what Europeans have achieved in bringing the highest functioning society to bear that encapsulates beauty, science, technology, literature, art, architecture in a never seen or witnessed before ‘kinda way’, we have the least in group preference of any ethnic group or countries that have a majority of homogeneity – many reasons for it, but the biggest enemy looks exactly like us.
This is very true. Individualism run amok. The incident with Turks ganging up on the German kid brings is the perfect example. It also highlights another problem; the fact that many Whites — especially Germans — follow the rules no matter what. No fighting means no fighting even if your getting your head kicked in.
I grew up with the implicit knowledge that I’m “white.” But “white” is not an ethnic group. Ta-Nehisi Coates observes that I am from “people who believe themselves to be white.” This phrase uncovers the truth that “white” is an idea created by people in power to maintain dominance. Thus who qualifies as “white” is continually shifting.
You can generally tell a lot about someone’s IQ level when they approvingly quote Ta-Nehisi Coates. Also, the above little kidney stone of wisdom from (of course) a Christian minister conveniently leaves out the fact that when it comes time to condemn someone for the horrific crime of racism, all the people who previously touted whiteness as some sort of ethereal and amorphous concept will invariably know exactly who is white and who is not.
I’ve said for a long time white laws are not a good fit for non-whites. As all they understand is inflicted brutality, how they are governed needs to reflect that reality.
And therefore the idea of universal access to cellphones with cameras is obviously a very bad idea.
This Walt Bismarck guy…funny thing is I was thinking about that cringy video he did recently. But we also should consider what substack is.
Greg said in a podcast he was jealous of substack. Don’t be. What you have here is much better. A lot of people miss that substack is a commerce platform to send out newsletters (spam*cough*) and to charge people for content which makes money for substack.
Its purpose and internal dynamics are about selling and extending marketing reach which means there is an enormous force pulling content towards the center, towards normieism and towards click bait ‘Why I’ve changed my mind on…” titles and formats.
It’s little more than TikTok for semi-literate people, bourgeois types and cat ladies.
It’s no surprise to me right-leaning types using this platform are then trying to increase their acceptability and audience by making posts distancing themselves from their past ‘bad’ behavior, reframing what the problem is- like that Richard Hanania guy. The sincerity of these posts extends as far as the perceived value they provide the writer in the context of substack. The problem is in large part substack itself encouraging these behaviors.
Commenting and linking to this stuff, even negatively is what they want.
Be careful attaching any serious intent or credibility to anything posted on that platform.
Expect to see a lot more of this over time, our people distancing themselves from their past on substack specifically or putting down their principles, cozying up to notorious bad actors (Cofnas) and shifting their content to the center. The platform itself is shaping these dynamics.
I knew substack was total bullshit some time back when crackpots and liars and frauds were using it to say the covid vaxxes were self-assembling AI nanobots run by 5G, that they had been ‘poisoned’ by spike protein nano particles by someone out to get them no less for their views on vax and so on. But they were getting a giant audience for this stuff.
I know maybe a couple of years back some of us liked Robert Malone as a voice of sanity and substack was his platform. Maybe, but I don’t have those feelings anymore. At this point Malone is 100% part of the grifting op.
I would consider a policy of zero tolerance. If it’s on substack ignore it.
I’ve said for many years, to much wailing and gnashing of teeth, that both wokeness and Christianity hinge on the very concept of guilt: defining it, assigning it, and punishing it while offering a Magical Salvation Loophole to those who slavishly parrot the Gospel.
White people refuse to fight for anything, and I don’t mean in the streets. Rather, I’m talking about cherished ideas and symbols. This is apparent, above all, in the current chatter about “our democracy.” The Establishment redefines democracy as relentless obstruction of the will of the voters. The right acquiesces in this nonsense and defines itself in opposition to democracy, never mind the fact that it is well-documented that the subversion of the West has been top-down rather than bottom-up.
The Left has redefined equality to mean sameness, interchangeability, and entitlement, and the right lets them get away with it. This is particularly egregious since anyone who has more than one child knows they are different, often spectacularly so, but doesn’t love the one any more or less than the other on that account. On the other hand, that your neighbor’s children are just as good, or even cuter or smarter than your own children doesn’t make you feel obligated to include them in your will. Equality doesn’t mean that your neighbor gets to break into your house and “help themselves to all your stuff,”* much less take over your house and start ordering you around. Literally, everyone in the world with two brain cells to rub together understands this, but the right will not fight for “equality” either.
Non-whites say Christianity requires Whites to give them whatever they want. What does Mr. Goad do? That’s right. He says Christianity requires Whites to give non-Whites anything they want. He could, instead, point out that JC wouldn’t approve of pummeling people in the streets and when are black preachers going to start pointing that out? He could point out that Jesus wouldn’t approve of carpet bombing or loan-sharking.
He might also point out that perpetual guilt-mongering is inconsistent with the spirit of the Gospel, and possibly hazardous to one’s eternal soul. From the most perfect and beautiful prayer ever composed: “Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.” Surely, if we’re required to forgive ongoing trespasses, as documented in this article, then others are so much the more obligated to forgive old trespasses, like the Emmet Till story that is always in the news even though it happened decades ago. The right throws the fight here, too. Why is that?
Maybe I’m missing something, but it seems to me that the right is willing to let the mainstream left continue to define all the terms and control all the symbols. I can’t see it working out well.
*I can’t remember who said this, but it comes from a BUGS podcast from years ago. Does anyone remember it?
I’m with Jim. Christians don’t simply act in a way that goes against White Identity Nationalism, the use their religion to endorse attacking Whites and Whiteness. So, before claiming that all us Christian nay-sayers need to remind Christians as to what Christianity is really all about, perhaps all the pro-White Christians could get in there and mix it up with their fellow Christians to set them straight.
Go seize control of your Church’s ecclesia or synod and get them to endorse ‘White Lives Matter’ and preach White Identity Nationalism from the pulpit. When you’re done, get back to me about how people like me have it all wrong and ‘real Christianity has never been tried’.
There’s not a dime’s worth of difference in racial ideology between mainstream Christianity and Woke Liberalism.
I’m with Jim. Christians don’t simply act in a way that goes against White Identity Nationalism, the use their religion to endorse attacking Whites and Whiteness.
No, they’re not, HT. Only a small minority do this. Granted, they’re the rich and powerful ones, but they haven’t taken away White people’s right to vote yet, and Evangelicals voted, in droves, for the “racist” Donald Trump in 2016 when he was promising to build the wall and deport them all.
You ignore this because of confirmation bias. You look at what little you know of Christian philosophy and assume that Christians must be woke. The problem is that you don’t understand the significance of the Protestant doctrine of total depravity. Unlike liberals who think we can and should be “perfected,” protestants have no illusions about what is likely to happen happen to a White American minority.
So, before claiming that all us Christian nay-sayers need to remind Christians as to what Christianity is really all about, perhaps all the pro-White Christians could get in there and mix it up with their fellow Christians to set them straight.
Go seize control of your Church’s ecclesia or synod and get them to endorse ‘White Lives Matter’ and preach White Identity Nationalism from the pulpit. When you’re done, get back to me about how people like me have it all wrong and ‘real Christianity has never been tried’.
Why don’t Whites go take control of the Republican party? Because they’re bought and paid for. Show me one institution of Western society that has resisted the pressure to conform to mainstream racial liberalism. Oh right, there aren’t any. You single out the churches because you don’t like them. Period.
TPTB signal boost the bits of Christianity they can use and repress what they view as “problematic” with media intimidation and demonization campaigns. If you want us to take control of anything we’re going to need money. There are more White male billionaires than Jewish billionaires. WTH are they?
There’s not a dime’s worth of difference in racial ideology between mainstream Christianity and Woke Liberalism.
I’ll repeat, two words: Total Depravity.
This Walt Bismarck is either some kind of deradicalization-agent (from Antifa or DHS), or he has been completely demoralized, and in either case he is not very intelligent
How can anyone say that a dissident movement, whose basic goal (I mean the goal of any dissident movement) is to undermine and resist the state until the state at least changes its policies, or is preferably reconstituted with the dissident movement at its helm, should seek to aid the state, that is, to seek to make the state more stable and more efficient?
White people after all built America, and are now subjected by its government to racial replacement, wealth redistribution, cultural distortion, community disruption, and so on. So how can he expect (as he claims to still desire the ends of white nationalism) that we will be rewarded by redirecting our political movement, which is now the target of the intense hatred of the political-cultural establishment and a useful boogeyman for the state, to the benefit of that state, we will be rewarded?
his political realignment is apparently driven by thoughts of interracial unions producing LA RAZA COSMICA which will become browner and browner inevitably reaching third-world standards according to his program
https://www.vox.com/2021/5/10/22425178/catalist-report-2020-election-biden-trump-demographics
this trend is actually slowing and will probably reverse in november
that would be to stop mass migration and other dysgenic trends and restore a homogenous, high-IQ, high-trust society
And how awful is this compared to continued mass migration, which would bring our standard of living down to a Mexican or South African level?
“The state must remain financially viable and functional in the medium term, so that it can continue enforcing mass migration into the country and wealth transfers from Whites”
We should preserve the American Empire, so that America will remain open, stable, and prosperous, so that my wealth can grow, and White replacement can continue
We can imagine that the author is talking about his own situation – he is materially comfortable (for now), and so he is no longer worried about the future of his country, or of his race. It is not a great tragedy for the movement to have lost such a person
And he uses AI image generation, even his avatar is this awful blur of color, so he must not be very discriminating in general
I should also note happily that the comments under his post are overwhelmingly critical
Wasn’t Walt doxed as Blake Neff who worked for Tucker, resigned, and is now working for TPUSA? If so it whould be easy to determine if he actually wrote this swill.
It looks like Blake Neff used to post as “CharlesXII.” I don’t think it’s the same person as “Walt Bismarck.”
I had to look myselfand see if “this swill” wasn’t writ by Wile E. Hibernigger/Lyin Ryan. Don’t let this ZOGbot’s ZOGbux turn you into another BiPolar Bradifer or Cunthair Walrus once he ‘cycles’.
Hail Victory!!!`
I’m beginning to feel like a broken record, but here I go again. Wokeness is incompatible with Christianity. This so-called “minister” has started a new religion. Christianity actually allows slavery. His slave-owning ancestors were Christians. The White men who conquered the world were Christians. All the segregationists down South were Christians. Just because someone calls himself a Christian, doesn’t make him one. If you show up one Sunday at one of these fake “churches” you’ll find a mostly empty building. The Churches that are full, full of good White people who try to keep their families away from blacks and their culture, don’t dare preach that woke nonsense. It’s opposite of what’s written in their Bibles.
Were the white Christians who for centuries waged holy war against their pagan and infidel co-ethnics for not worshipping a rabbi-on-a-stick also “True Christians™”?
Do you think the Pagans weren’t trying to kill the Christians? Are you aware of Viking raids against Christians? Germanic raids, before they converted? Should the Christians have just bent over and taken it?
I wasn’t defending the Vikings and heathens of yore, I was asking a simple question. Are you going to answer it?
If pagans had wanted to kill Christians, there would have been no Christians.
You never heard of Roman, Persian, Germanic, Scandanavian, etc. attacks on Christians? Really? And who won? Christians. Go worship a tree with Greta if you want. I’ll stick with the God White people worshipped when they conquered the world.
Were the white Christians who for centuries waged holy war against their pagan and infidel co-ethnics for not worshipping a rabbi-on-a-stick also “True Christians™”?
Suppose we say, yes, they were true Christians and they committed horrible atrocities. We apologize on their behalf. Would that be an end of it or are you seeking reparations? Or is this just going to be a forever grievance you use as a bludgeon against Christianity to avoid the question of whether any alternative worldview is preferable for one reason or another?
Michael is right, woke grievance-mongering is indeed the opposite of what is in the Bible, and your bitterness proves the whole point of Christian forgiveness despite you. Maybe one of Tolstoy’s parables will warm your heart and open your mind.
A Spark Neglected Burns the House
https://youtu.be/NNv1T-V3EKA?si=ew0ETyiXpinemfwD
I don’t have any bitterness whatsoever toward the average Christian. I’m just trying to understand what a “real Christian” is, if, according to Michael, a progressive Christian is not real a Christian.
It seems to me like the vast majority of Christians consider the vast majority of Christians to be fake Christians, and even the “real” Christians seem hellbent (no pun intended) on conformity to a Middle Eastern religion.
Why should white people support such a divisive, deracinating religion? Is a “real Christian” going to banish me from society for skipping church on Sundays?
I’ve seen pro-white people have to neuter themselves and bite their tongues after getting more involved in certain Christian churches. Or they end up straining to reconcile what they know about race with their church’s different teachings about race, or they do the “well, this is what he really meant” routine when church leaders like the Pope or LDS leaders come out with some “diversity is our strength” type garbage. I like the things you say, but does the fact that many past Christians did great pro-white things mean that more of us becoming Christian today would make us more likely to be pro-white? Scriptures can be cherry-picked and interpreted any which way, and how will everyone agree on the same interpretation? What about the universalist nature of Christianity? And how about the idea that a Christian in Botswana is as much the “brother” of a Christian in Rexburg, Idaho as anyone?
These are good, and good-faith, questions.
I like the things you say, but does the fact that many past Christians did great pro-white things mean that more of us becoming Christian today would make us more likely to be pro-white?
Probably not. I don’t think Christianity is either pro-White or anti-White by its nature, though it can be weaponized for or against Whites. I just don’t see any reason why White people should let hostile elements define our religion for us.
Scriptures can be cherry-picked and interpreted any which way, and how will everyone agree on the same interpretation?
We don’t need to agree, and indeed we don’t all need to agree on whether the Bible is infallible. That a message comes from God doesn’t ensure that it will be interpreted and communicated perfectly. To rest one’s faith on Biblical inerrancy is to build one’s house on the sand. Of course, this raises the question of what are the essential beliefs of a Christian. I could go on about this extensively, but for now I’ll just say that it has to do with the triumph of divine mercy over justice and leave it at that.
What about the universalist nature of Christianity? And how about the idea that a Christian in Botswana is as much the “brother” of a Christian in Rexburg, Idaho than anyone?
I see these two questions as essentially the same. Does Christianity not posit one human family under one Heavenly Father? Yes, in a spiritual sense it does, but that doesn’t mean earthly particularities must be renounced. Indeed, they cannot be with risking chaos and misery.
Take Christian nationalism, for example, which seeks to turn a heavenly community into an earthly one. It makes no sense to me, because Christians are made, not born. White people are born, and when we are born White, we will remain White for the rest of our natural lives.
Not so with Christianity. Many are raised Christian and then leave. Maybe they come back, maybe they don’t. Indeed, some of our greatest Christian intellectuals have struggled through years of doubt, or even decisive atheism, and then come back with a stronger faith than ever. This is a natural process that must be embraced. Otherwise, everyone just believes without question until noone can remember why anyone believes anymore and the faith dies.
I fully expect my own children to ask questions. Indeed, I would assume I had done something wrong if they didn’t. Will my children become no longer my children, or less my children than some Botswanan, if and when they explore different paths? Would they no longer be citizens in good standing of some hypothetical Christian state? That’s absurd. Our very design as sexually reproductive beings with family ties precludes the idea.
It’s opposite of what’s written in their Bibles.
The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.
—Leviticus 19:34
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. —Galatians 3:28
Wow Jim, out of that massive book, this is all you’ve got?
The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.
—Leviticus 19:34
And yet, Israel has an ethnostate, don’t they? How? The passage doesn’t say they have to let every alien on the planet come and live among them to begin with, nor even a single one. Jews only immigration. The right to treat aliens differently is often exactly the problem: slavery, indentured servitude, H1B, etc. We don’t want a caste society, but a homogeneous ethnostate.
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. —Galatians 3:28
Galatians, the Magna Carta of Christian Freedom, is about the wholesale break from Judaism that many on the right like to pretend never happened. Hence, circumcision is not only unnecessary for Christian converts from paganism, but indeed represents a lack of faith in the Gospel:
Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
This passage is clearly hyperbolic, Jim, and the fact that Paul says “there is neither male nor female” should clue you in that the passage is not meant to be taken literally.
Oh, it’s “clearly hyperbolic.” So you’re saying that part of the Infallible Word is not to be taken seriously. I’m so thankful that people like you can jump in like a Living Concordance to tell us which parts to ignore. Otherwise, people might start doing crazy things such as taking the Word at its word.
Israel has an ethnostate because Israelis reject the New Testament. That’s how. That wasn’t quite the “gotcha” question you seemed to think it was. Aside from the “accept the aliens” passage, the Old Testament is awash in passages about a nation for the Israelites. This is because the Bible contradicts the living fuck out of itself on every other page. Those sort of things happen when you’re dealing with four dozen or so authors writing over the course of a millennium or so. That’s also probably why it’s had such staying power—people can make it mean whatever they need it to mean.
“That’s all you’ve got?” If it’s a single passage that’s against racial nationalism, that’s more than enough. There isn’t a single passage in the New Testament that’s for racial nationalism for Europeans—or for anyone. If there is, kindly direct me to one in the New Testament. Just one. You said it’s a “massive” book, right? Then there should be at least one in the New Testament. Show it to me.
Christianity is not European. It’s Semitic. It’s a divisive wedge issue by design.
Oy vey, Jim, you continually refer to Christianity as “Semitic.” Then you demand support from the “Christian” (i.e. the Greek, European, non-Hebrew,non-Semitic if not anti-Semitic) “part of the Bible.” It’s either all one Semitic thing or it isn’t, Jim. You can’t have it both ways.
If you read it as all one thing, it looks to me like the Jews were chosen to show humanity how not to do it, like when you get a math problem wrong and the teacher writes it on the board so that others can avoid making the same mistake. Then, he chose the Greeks to lay the cultural and intellectual foundations of a new covenant and the Romans to build the peaceful, interconnected, secure empire through which his Apostles would spread the good news. Europeans being the new Chosen people, the imperative to remain “separate and distinct” applies as well to Europeans now as to the Israelites before Christ. After all, you can’t be a blessing to others, as Whites clearly have been, if you mix yourself out of existence.
This is not my theology, by the way. I’m just saying that it seems to me a reasonable interpretation of the Bible, cover to cover, that a European Christian might hold. Your arbitrary demand for a particular verse justifying White Nationalism thus misses the forest for the trees.
On the other hand, if you read the testaments as separate things, on what basis do you consider Christianity to be “Semitic” and therefore foreign and not European. The fact is that Christian universalism doesn’t come from the Jews. It comes from the Greeks, and I am proud of it. We recognize that every human being has a soul that reflects the divine nature. Yes, we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights… so let’s don’t enslave, plunder, or exterminate each other, m’kay?
Now, though I think your demand for a Bible verse justifying European nationalism misses the point, I can provide you with a verse that acknowledges that we don’t owe the same duties to every single Christian on the planet. Rather the particulars of our duties depend on kinship:
But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel. 1 Timothy 5:8.
That is strong language, isn’t it?
Your obsession with what the Bible says and doesn’t say stems from your failure to appreciate that there is more than one kind of revelation: there is the general revelation available to all in nature as well as the special revelation of Scripture. Hence, Christians generally believe that polygamy is impermissible for all, and not merely church leaders as provided in 1 Timothy, the reason being that the sex ratio in God’s created order is 1:1.
I’m not sure that treating an alien decently is all that woke, it was pretty common even among pagan tribes in Europe. Allowing a negro or Chinaman to worship the One True God doesn’t mean you have to open your borders or not enforce laws. When America was segregated, it was Christian. Now, when White Americans have abandoned Christianity, we have open borders and forced integration as well as a degraded culture. I don’t think it’s a coincidence.
It might not quite be “woke,” but it’s definitely anti-segregationist. You implied that Christianity is segregationist and that this is a biblical stance. Fine. Show me one passage in the New Testament—the Christian part of the Bible—that is for racial separation between Europeans and others. I hate to sound like a broken record, but Christianity is a majority nonwhite religion worldwide. How the heck did that happen?
The Southern Baptists had a whole theology that justified segregation. One that I remember is that blacks were the descendents of Shem and were therefore condemned to slavery. Many Southern Preachers released sermons and books justifying segregation including, Rev Daniel Carey who’s ‘God, the Original Segregationist’ sold a million copies.
So you’re quickly pivoting from what was “in their Bibles” (which was what you originally said) to obsolete Southern Baptist doctrine, which not only have they recanted, but it contradicted Leviticus 19:34 and Galatians 3:28 and only represented about 5% of American Christians and roughly one in every 200 Christians worldwide?
What’s your next move—”A hundred and ninety-nine out of every 200 Christians worldwide aren’t ‘true’ Christians”?
It’s simultaneously astounding, amusing, and depressing to watch the hoops that certain people will jump through in their attempts to reconcile these two fundamentally irreconcilable philosophies.
The segregationist theology is so vast and all-encompassing I didn’t think this little back and forth was adequate to begin such a conversation. You don’t like the Ham comparisons? How about the order to keep separate from the Caananites? How about the Tower of Babel? The Hebrews were allowed to kill whole tribes that were different. These were all used to justify segregation as well as many other passages. But in the end, you can’t deny that when America was segregated, it was a church-going nation. The African Methodist Church was founded because White parishioners physically removed blacks whio tried to go to the White Methodist Church. America has stopped being a church-going nation and it’s no longer segregated. If that can’t cause you to understand my point, I guess nothing will. If you really want to read the direct passages used to justify segregation, read the book by Rev Carey that I cited before. He’s much better qualified than me to cite scripture
I’ve already said that the Old Testament can be used to justify nationalism, at least for Jews. And I’ve also repeatedly asked everyone to show me at least one passage in the New Testament—the Christian part of the Bible—that endorses ethnic nationalism rather than condemns it, as Galatians 3:28 does, and none of you have. Rather than telling me to do the heavy lifting by reading some obscure book, I will ask you yet again to show me a single New Testament passage that unequivocally endorses racial nationalism. You’re able to type out these long responses, but you can’t find one New Testament verse? Just because you can cite the Segregationist Chapel of the Northern Ozarks isn’t proof of anything except the fact that they don’t follow the New Testament’s doctrine about race-blindness under Christ.
There’s a reason it’s called the New Testament—because the old covenant was tossed out. Jesus said it was no longer “an eye for an eye” and was now “turn the other cheek.” The rules had changed. Apparently the God of the Old Testament had erred in the rules he laid out, so Jesus came along and said the old rules no longer applied.
In fact, the very existence of the New Testament is a contradiction and refutation of the Old Testament. One of the reasons I stopped believing is that in the Torah, God lays down one law after the next and states that it’s an eternal law never to be revoked. Then Jesus comes along and says, “Nope—new deal here.”
The sad fact is that the Bible is one of the most contradictory and flawed books ever cobbled together, which I guess is what happens when you have four dozen or so separate Jewish authors writing over the course of about 1000 years.
It continues to baffle me that either: 1) People can’t see all of the glaring contradictions; or: 2) They see them but lie to themselves about it.
But in the end, you can’t deny that when America was segregated, it was a church-going nation.
America was also a non-computer-using nation back then. I guess we should all throw our computers away, and segregation will magically reemerge. There’s a very simple concept known as “correlation does not imply causation.”
Are you going to deny that modern Christianity is almost 100% anti-racist?
All I’ve ever said is that people need to treat Christianity and race as separate topics, but they insist on gluing the two things together.
Okay Jim, I’ll give it a shot. Not mine, but one used by segregationists. Acts 17:26 “And He (God) made from every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and boundaries of their dwelling place”. In other words, we’re supposed to remain separate. This is one of the New Testament verses used to justify segregation. And yes, I will admit there is an infection within many churches who call themselves Christian who embrace miscegenation. They’ve been around a couple weeks compared to the 2,000 year history of the Church. But just because they call themselves Christian, if they embrace a theology that was never accepted for the previous 2,000 years, how can they actually be “Christian”. They’ve started a new religion and are just trying to get a little juice by using the name that used to be on the building. If I go around saying I’m a Stoic, but cry like a baby when I get a paper cut, am I really a Stoic? If I go around saying I’m a Christian but create a new theology that rejects the teaching of the last 2,000 years, am I a Christian?
I didn’t give you Rev Carey to make you do any heavy lifting, you seem like the kind of guy who likes reading and the million-copy selling book from the 50s is an easy read. There are many other books on the subject if you have any interest and the Mormons also had a decent justification for segregation up until a few weeks ago.
Christianity is definitely incompatible with Europe. “What happened” you ask? After the political goals were achieved the church leaderships essentially allowed paganism to remain via the pantheon of saints in Catholicism and Orthodoxy. The latter at least remained much more mystical and remains so to this day. The same thing happened with Shia Muslims in Iran. I personally have progressively rid myself of most attachment to Xianity but I do have a soft spot for the Greek church. I wrote a novel about how JC’s life via the NT was basically pointless and doomed to failure, if anyone is interested. https://www.johnkolchak.com/next-year-in-jerusalem
The sad fact is that the Bible is one of the most contradictory and flawed books ever cobbled together, which I guess is what happens when you have four dozen or so separate Jewish authors writing over the course of about 1000 years.
It continues to baffle me that either: 1) People can’t see all of the glaring contradictions; or: 2) They see them but lie to themselves about it.
Jim, when you refuse to listen to anything people say unless they give you exactly what you want when you want it, you’re probably going to be baffled by people. That’s what happens when you act like an imperious know-it-all d-bag. (And no, you are not immune from criticism just because we’re having an argument. It is not an “adhom” to insist that you follow some basic rules of polite debate.)
Now, on to the merits. Did it ever occur to you that we don’t care about the contradictions? You have an exceedingly narrow view of the value of Scripture. It’s either 100% infallible from Genesis to Revelation or its worthless trash to be rejected in toto. Many WN are here because we have a profound love for our own heritage, and along with that usually goes a conservative instinct. Rather than throw the baby out with the bathwater like you, we prefer to salvage what we can. WTF is your problem with that, Jim? Like it or not, a great deal of the Western musical and artistic cannon is rooted in that book.
I wonder, Jim, do you get warm fuzzies at Christmas time? If not, you’re missing out. Try listening to some Christmas carols next year. Listen to Josh Groban sing O Holy Night, or listen to Dan Vasc sing Angels We Have Heard on High. If you’re just a meat robot with no soul, whence the goosebumps, transcendent feeling of bliss and well-being, or even tears? You can explain it with brain chemicals, but then you have to explain the brain chemicals, that for some reason just so happen to exist and make me cry like a baby whenever I hear Bob Seger sing Little Drummer Boy.
You know the picture of God reaching out to Adam on the cieling of the Sistine Chapel? Adam is reaching out to God, too. That is how I view Scripture, and indeed all attempts at human wisdom. It is a record of our reaching out. Many of us say the same about pagan mythology. (What’s the deal with Odin hanging himself on a tree for Wisdom?)
All I’ve ever said is that people need to treat Christianity and race as separate topics, but they insist on gluing the two things together.
No, Jim that isn’t all you ever said. Look here:
I’ve said for many years, to much wailing and gnashing of teeth, that both wokeness and Christianity hinge on the very concept of guilt: defining it, assigning it, and punishing it while offering a Magical Salvation Loophole to those who slavishly parrot the Gospel.
Apart from the obnoxious disrespect for people’s religious beliefs that I would object to directed at any White person, including neopagans, do you expect Christians not to read this as an assertion on your part that we are a problem if not the problem?
I’m getting really creepy totalitarian vibes from this thread. I’m having visions of Jim in jack boots living up to the stereotype of the fascist thug. Sambo upthread sounds like he’s one paranoid fantasy away from a Final Solution to the Christian problem. I can only imagine how this must come across to strangers.
Christianity has always been Woke. That’s why Woke is taking over Christianity. At no time has Christianity ever been anything other than corrosive of local customs and traditional White spirituality. In the Roman Empire days, Christianity was a corrosive force. In White Europe, Christianity was a corrosive force to the culture and spiritual practices of the White peoples of Europe.
Christianity cannot unify White people do defend themselves because Christianity does not care whether White people survive or not. It only cares about whether Christianity survives or not.
Globally, whites are less than 10% of the population – and declining rapidly. North America and Western Europe will be majority non white in population sometimes this century. Add to this the fact, that uniquely amongst the world’s people’s white political ‘leaders’ always but always side with blacks/browns against whites and advocate for ever increasing black/brown immigration. Add also the fact that this will never but never change.
In short, the white race is fucked.
Making demographic predictions for the long term is a fool’s game, but saying that, I would not in the least be surprised if actual extinction of the white race – as what happened with many animal species – will occur centuries hence.
Walt Bismarck: “I predict that politics will continue to depolarize around race…”
What alternate reality/fantasy world does this guy live in?
Yep, it’s beyond comical. His other channel name used to be “Uncuck the Right.” Well, “Uncuck the Right” went and got himself cucked.
Who could have guessed that after denouncing white nationalism, Walt Bismarck would be hosted on Richard Hanania’s Substack podcast?
He praised Hanania five times in his “Why I’m No Longer a White Nationalist” essay.
On that Bismarck guy: There is one very BIG BIG BIG elephant in the White N. room: The Great Replacement is NOT against the interests of the White upper-middle classes. The ordinary White middle classes will be replaced by East Asians and Indians, the working class will be dilluted by brown people, but the top 10-20% of Whites will continue to be the dominant social class of Western countries like the USA, UK, France or Germany. The same goes for the top 20% of physically attractive Whites.
These people have always benefited maximally from globalisation and Non-whites are no competition for them. The fact is that people of color tend to look up to these elite Whites, even if they don’t admit it. This is also true of Jews. Sure, the Western white upper middle class will be mixed a bit with upper class Non-whites, but that won’t threaten them too much. Conversely, for them, the unwanted pressure and competition from ordinary and poor Huwhites will disappear. Talented and obedient workers will be found among the Indians and the Chinese.
These are points I’ve been making since the 1990s and that I reiterated in my “Rich Snobs v. Poor Slobs” article. The people who put Trump over the top in 2016 were economically disenfranchised “unstable white trash” from the Rust Belt, not pampered, meme-spinning anons who play at politics as if it were Minecraft.
Replying to “Lexi” because these threads tap out after a certain point:
Yikes, that’s a lotta words to slalom around a simple admission of, “I mocknigly said, ‘that’s all you’ve got?,’ yet all I could come back with from that ‘massive’ book was some verse about taking care of people in your home—ethnicity and nationality not specified—which, if I wanted to be honest, had nothing to do with the sort of verse you requested.”
And then of course you leap into the typical ad-hom gaslighting deflections such as my “obsession” with the Bible (even though “Michael” was the first one to bring up the Bible by misrepresenting it) and my “failure” to appreciate things and the other guy’s “bitterness” about Christianity, etc.
I’m pretty sure that The Bible is the official User’s Manual for Christianity. Otherwise, “Christianity” is just something you improvise on the fly to suit your emotional needs.
There is no need to put “Semitic” in quotes when talking about the New Testament, seeing as nearly all of its authors were Semites and, to my knowledge, none were biologically Greek or from elsewhere in Europe. They were diaspora Jews who wrote in Greek and operated under the impression that the Semites’ long-promised messiah had arrived. Calling them “Greek” is analogous to referring to black NBA players as “English.” Nearly all of the crucial events in the New Testament—whose arch-villains are the Romans, who are some of the only legitimately European characters—also happen in the Middle East. It’s astronomically more accurate to call the New Testament “Semitic” than to call it “Greek” or “European.”
There is no need to put “Semitic” in quotes when talking about the New Testament, seeing as nearly all of its authors were Semites and, to my knowledge, none were biologically Greek or from elsewhere in Europe.
What kind of absurd magical thinking is this, Jim? You have repeatedly admitted that the “Christian” part of the Bible is radically different from what you must admit is the Jewish part. Yet, despite the radical worldview differences, you seem to think that the Gospel authors’ and Paul’s jewyness somehow magically rubbed off on the NT, thus making it “Semitic” rather than Greek.
Of course, if you want to say that the NT is Semitic because the NT authors were Jews by birth, regardless of the actual content of their writings, then this whole conversation is pointless, because you’ve resorted to the genetic fallacy to justify your evident hostility to Christianity.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/genetic
They were diaspora Jews who wrote in Greek and operated under the impression that the Semites’ long-promised messiah had arrived.
Jim, only a Hellenized Jew who not only writes in Greek, but also thinks like a Greek, would ever have recognized Jesus as the Messiah. Because Jesus bore no resemblance whatsoever to the Messiah the Jews were waiting for.
Nearly all of the crucial events in the New Testament also happen in the Middle East.
This magic Middle East dirt theory is even more retarded than your jew genes argument. The Middle East was not then what it is now, Jim. It was part of the Hellenized Roman Empire. A history lesson from Iron Maiden:
A Phrygian King had bound a chariot yoke
And Alexander cut the ‘Gordian knot’
And legend said that who untied the knot
He would become the master of Asia
Hellenism he spread far and wide
The Macedonian learned mind
Their culture was a western way of life
He paved the way for Christianity
Marching on, marching on
This magic Middle East dirt theory is even more [ad-hominem] than your jew genes argument. The Middle East was not then what it is now, Jim. It was part of the Hellenized Roman Empire.
This implies that everyone in the Middle East back then was magically a Greek/Roman hybrid and that their “jew genes” were irrelevant because Rome had jurisdiction over the territory. Does this on a site where the validity of genetics is a foundational idea and that one’s genes travel with you wherever you go. Carefully sidesteps the fact that Christianity wouldn’t have existed without the Old Testament’s Semitic belief system and the Semitic genes of Jesus, the apostles, and the New Testament’s authors.
Copy-pastes a link about the “genetic fallacy” while fallaciously resorting to appeal to nature by implying I ever said, even once, that anything was “good” or “bad” about the concept that genes influence thought and behavior.
And then copy-pastes a poem!
In contradiction to the Twitter/X image of ‘Klaus Arminius’, White kids aren’t fighting back only because they’re ‘less violent’. They’re not fighting back because they are outnumbered and have learned that they’re not part of a tribe that will defend them.
When White adults start leaving their neighborhoods and demolishing the lives and livelihoods of their racial enemies, White kids will feel comfortable standing up for themselves.
I don’t advocate for violence, but without the deterrent effect of organized White violence, White children in mixed-race neighborhoods will be abused or join the other side.
Responding to Michael:
At least you attempted to come up with a passage, so congratulations. But it’s a tepid passage compared to Galatians 3:28, and to say that tepid passage represents “2000 years of teaching” while Galatians 3:28 represents “weeks” is hyperbole.
And at least you didn’t resort to ad-hominem attacks like “Lexi” seems to do no matter what the topic is or to whom she’s responding.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment