The evilness behind the hypocrisy of certain people is immediately recognizable.
**
Lorikeet wrote:
„Americanism = messianism. It will tolerate no other system
Liberalism was supposed to undermine resistance to Americanism's planned
New World Order.
New World Order = Americanism.
Americanism = no borders; free movement of resources, including human;
no cultures, or religions, or anything that will disrupt this 'open
borders world'; no ethnicities, races, sexes/genders, any biological
identifiers - all will become a product and a service on the open markets;
open markets, regulated by American corporations, censoring, filtering
out anything that challenges Americanism; Tikkun Olam - a uniform, hermaphrodite
world rules by a secularized priestly class: ethical authorities, experts,
idols/icons of Americanism's ideals; nihilism: erasure of all naturally
based identities converting them and inverting them linguistically into
pure abstractions, i.e., pure ideas that can be easily manipulated and
exploited by minds using semiotics - "healing" the world form
its conflicting diversity.
Liberalism is backfiring, degenerating Americanism's citadel faster
than it is undermining resistance to its dominion.
This is why Trump was elected - promoted by a segment of America's ((elites))
that realized, a bit too late, that their strategy was exposing them
to the threats that were supposed to destroy other peoples.
They changed their strategy adapting to emerging new unforeseen circumstances,
proposing a consolidation of America's power, in preparation for the
US's future role, in a multipolar world, as a regional, and not a global
power: one of many Super-States currently emerging.
Those in real power - the Deep state, neo-con, ex-Troskyite, Zionists
- presently ruling the US, refuse to admit defeat.....so full of themselves
they are, and they insist on maintaining the same strategies, the same
foreign policies, the US established in the psot-war years.
The pivotal point being America's apex, the decades between 1960 and
1980 - baby boomer, Hillies generation Frankfurt School infected generation.
It was downhill from there.“ **
I rather believe that the superstates are also part of the strategy
because they cannot yet be forged into a single entity. Later on, it will
no longer be the US but China that will be the preferred partner of the
much more powerful but few private data-and-money-people.
On the supposedly „open markets“:
The supposed „open markets“ are neither open nor markets.
They are merely the area in which the very few most powerful people on
this planet - as I said: private data-and-money-people - want to cavort,
each having their own monopoly and defending it with and not (at least
not yet) against the other monopolists, which may look like an oligopoly
to the outside world, but are in fact several monopolies. Monopolies are
on the economic side what monarchies are on the political side. So the
monopolists (monarchs) will eventually compete against each other and
destroy each other, and if one is left standing, he's been damn lucky.
Something new will emerge from this chaos. I don't mean this in the
sense of the so-called „Old Testament“, but entirely in the
sense of the facts that will have been created by then, and they will
not look like the „Old Testament“.
States no longer have any power, but have degenerated into mere functionaries
of those who really have power. History will show whether this will change
again.
Humans will probably have to start again where they left off in the
period between the Upper Palaeolithic Age and the Neolithic Age. But perhaps
they will not be able to start again at all. In any case, they cannot
expect a seamless development.
The only hope we can have is that the brakemen on the current unhealthy
development will bring about something that will then perhaps lead to
a turnaround.
It only works with the brakemen! Not with others.
Lorikeet wrote:
„They changed their strategy and adapted it to the new, unforeseen
circumstances, proposing a consolidation of American power to prepare
for the future role of the US in a multipolar world as a regional rather
than a global power: one of many superstates currently emerging.
Those who are really in power - the deep state, the neoconservatives,
the ex-Troskyites, the Zionists - who currently rule the US refuse to
admit defeat ....“ **
I also assume a multipolar world, albeit a staged one, because it is
unipolar dominated.
Why do you assume a multipolar world?
Lorikeet wrote:
„Libertad women - freed from biological males - raise the type
of males they then complain about.
Ironically ..., the type is always in accordance with prevailing systemic
norms - since they are now provided and protected by institutions -
the state - helping them believe in the delusion that they are strong
and independent.
The systemic ideal male is feminized - hypermasculinity and the masculinization
of females being a byproduct of male feminization.“ **
Yes, women are becoming more and more masculine and men more and more
feminine, so that in the end there shall be neither women nor men, because
there shall be neither those who can give birth to offspring naturally
nor those who are intelligent enough to be globally competitive. There
shall only be a few, only stupids, only poors, only „equals“
..., thus only those who can no longer pose a threat to the power above
them. This few, stupid, poor, equal, hermaphroditic slaves shall work
and be allowed to consume, if following with enough courage the only true
religion, but nothing else.
However, we must be aware that „existence“ means something
different in continental Europe and Iceland than in countries where English
is the main language (UK, Ireland, USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand).
Apart from a prelude in German Idealism, Kierkegaard from Denmark was
probably the first real existential philosopher, others being above all
Jaspers, Heidegger (the latter as the best existential philosopher - with
fundamental ontology, analysis of existence, etc.) and others from Germany,
Sarte, Merleau-Ponty and others from France, whereby the reference to
German Idealism, especially Hegel’s, is of great importance. It should
also be borne in mind that there is quite a bit of phenomenology in German
and French existential philosophy and that German existential philosophy
preceded French existential philosophy and differs from it somewhat in
other respects.
Could it be that by „existence“ you simply mean „everything
that is in the universe“? If so, then a continental European and
also an Icelander (if there were an existential philosopher in Iceland)
would say that „existence“ and „everything that is in the
universe“ have a lot in common, but both do nevertheless not mean
the same thing. In any case, every continental European would say that
there is not only an objective side to existence, but always a subjective
side to existence as well. Every continental European existential philosopher
also always takes into account the subjective side of existence - one
more than the other.
So please explain to me what exactly you mean by „existence“,
because I wonder whether you can agree with the continental European interpretation
of it.
Humanize wrote:
„Humans create or at least highly manipulate their environments;
we don't just adapt to survive, we adapt our own environments to ourselves.“
**
And this means that there is not only a natural evolution, but also
a cultural evolution (history). And the latter can contradict the former,
fight against it, also successfully, even if ultimately unsuccessfully,
because nature is superior to culture, but this is not so important for
us as historical beings, because what interests us is what has effects
in a relatively short time.
Humanize wrote:
„So using environment against genes as some kind of excuse just
won't cut it. I mean sure, it does play a role, like there are certain
incidental or accidental factors at play affecting people today who
happen to be born this race or that race in whatever places on earth,
but... let's not forget that those places and their environmental influences
were created by previous humans and didn't just show up randomly for
no reason. .... No one knows the exact amount of genetic influence on
things like intelligence, but we know it exists, and at least some people
are trying to measure it.“ **
For the development of intelligence and thus also for the development
of intelligent cultures (advanced civilizations), firstly the genes, secondly
the landscape (natural environment) and only thirdly also the so-called
„social“ are important. Because the third (supposedly „social“)
is already predetermined by the cultural - i.e. the language (understood
as culture) - and can therefore only complete - nothing more.
1.) I don’t have to say much about genetics here. So I assume the
knowledge about it.
2.) Too hot and too cold climates are not well suited for the development
of intelligence/intelligent cultures. Europe, due to its climate, especially
in its Northern and Western half, is a unique place for the development
of intelligence/intelligent cultures. Thanks to the North Atlantic Stream,
which is fed by the Gulf Stream, it is never too cold and never too warm,
bur even much warmer than it should be according to its latitudes and
its proximity to the continental climate of Asia.
3.) However, Europeans are also easily influenced by this, namely because
of their cultural, especially technical success. The prosperity that came
relatively quickly due to the technical success made them decadent just
as quickly. First the degeneration attacked the nobility, then the upper
bourgeoisie and finally the petty bourgeoisie.
Humanize wrote:
„But I mean, absent the civil rights era and all that shit, we
might have largely overcome racial disparities by now.“ **
No.
Humanize wrote:
„Certainly SOME differences would still have persisted even in
that utopian situation, but they would have been very minor compared
to the racial differences we see in the world around us today.“
**
It is part of a strategy. And that is why the problem - with it money
and thus power is gained - should not and will not be solved by the world
strategists. It will be solved by history itself or - at last - by natural
evolution. What does that mean? Humans will make mistakes; by doing so,
either history (cultural evolution) or natural evolution will punish them.
https://ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=198513&start=600#p2919623
https://ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=198513&start=625#p2920055
https://ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=198513&p=2920673#p2920673
The white IQ is higher than the yellow (Northeast Asian) IQ!
The reason why white IQ is still shown as lower in some statistics is
that the IQ of immigrants to white countries pushes down white IQ and
white countries no longer allow statistics on pure white IQ alone. This
is racism practiced in white countries by white people against white people
who are no longer allowed to have an identity (and perhaps soon no right
to live?).
Language must be freed from the prison in which it finds itself, because
the enemies of language, for strategic reasons, do not allow it to be
evaluated as it deserves.
Exaltist Ethan wrote:
„It's been a long time since I post here, but I've been wanting
to make a thread/poll about this chart that Redeemed Zoomer made online.
According to Redeemed Zoomer, there are ten large basic theological
premises that can be made if you ask certain theological questions.
The list of different results include: Atheist, Buddhist, "Spiritual
but Not Religious", Pagan, Hindu, Sikh, Deist, Jewish, Muslim and
Christian. Hinduism seems to be unique in this chart because there's
two ways to become Hindu: be polytheistic and believe in reincarnation
or be monotheistic, believe God is not separate from the Universe, and
worship idols.
I asked my best friend, the moderator of this forum, @Dannerz, and
my therapist what my result would be, and both of them thought it would
be Deist. It isn't. My result is actually Sikh. Given my result I have
actually bought a Sikh audiobook of their complete scriptural work on
Audible. I'm investigating the religion to see if there is more in common
between myself and them than just our panentheism.
Taking part of this chart is so easy and it only takes a few moments
of looking over it to see where you fit. Of course, there are more religious
positions than ten, and it is still highly unlikely that I'm going to
convert to Sikhism from a simple chart. Still, it's nice to see that
there is a religion that believes in my same theological premise. I
honestly know almost nothing about the religion, but I'm trying to learn
more about it.
What is your result? Are you surprised at your result or does it make
sense to you?
According to this chart, what religion are you?“ **
First of all: Nobody is a religion. I am not a religion, you are not
a religion and all the others are not religions. Religion is something
else. A religion is practised. You can perhaps also say that you
„have“ a religion, but you can never say that you „are“
a religion.
Have a look at my comment pinned to your picture.
Your picture, which is allegedly supposed to explain „all religions
in 10 minutes“, is good for nothing - typically nihilistic -, and
contains even more than the six errors I listed in my comment.
„A weak, immoral, disconnected, ignorant and unhealthy population
is an easy target for the next stage. The creation of an entire generation
of androgynous beings. Masculinity is under attack, pschologically, culturally
and biologically. Women are being replaced in sports, entertainment and
politics by men pretending to be women. And children are being indoctrinated
at school to thin k taht gender is a choice. The transgender movement
is not a grassroots movement. It comes from the top. It has n othing to
do with people's freedom of expression, sexuality or civil rights. It's
an evil psyop (psychological operation) with a clear agenda to get us
closer to transhumanism by making us question the most fundamental notion
of human identity, our gender.
If you don't know who you are, if you already indentify as a hybrid between
a man and a woman, you will be easily convinced to become a hybrid between
human and machine. Gender ideology is the »two plus two equals five«
from George Orwells »1984« dystopian novel. It's the final
test to see whether we will follow the most absurd party line towards
our own distinction. But two plus two equals four. And no matter how you
choose to dress, call yourself or change your physique will not change
that. The sad reality though is that in the gaslighting process to get
us closer to a post human future they have mentally and physically harmed
an increasing number of children and young people. And it's only getting
worse. This must be stopped.“ (Laura Aboli, „Transhumanism:
The End Game“, 2023  ).
„Eine schwache, unmoralische, unzusammenhängende, unkundige
und ungesunde Bevölkerung ist ein leichtes Ziel für die nächste
Stufe: Die Erschaffung einer ganzen Generation von androgynen Wesen. Die
Männlichkeit wird angegriffen, pschologisch, kulturell und biologisch.
Frauen werden im Sport, in der Unterhaltung und in der Politik durch Männer
ersetzt, die vorgeben, Frauen zu sein. Und Kindern wird in der Schule
beigebracht, daß das Geschlecht eine Wahl ist. Die Transgender-Bewegung
ist keine Graswurzelbewegung. Sie kommt von ganz oben. Sie hat nichts
mit der Meinungsfreiheit, der Sexualität oder den Bürgerrechten
der Menschen zu tun. Sie ist ein böser Psy Op (Psychologische Operation)
mit einem klaren Ziel, uns dem Transhumanismus näher zu bringen,
indem sie uns dazu bringt, den grundlegendsten Begriff der menschlichen
Identität, unser Geschlecht, in Frage zu stellen.
Wenn Sie nicht wissen, wer Sie sind, wenn Sie sich bereits als eine Mischung
aus Mann und Frau identifizieren, werden Sie leicht davon überzeugt
werden können, eine Mischung aus Mensch und Maschine zu werden. Die
Gender-Ideologie ist das »Zwei-plus-Zwei-gleich-Fünf«
aus George Orwells dystopischem Roman »1984«. Es ist der letzte
Test, um zu sehen, ob wir der absurdesten Parteilinie zu unserer eigenen
Unterscheidung folgen werden. Aber zwei plus zwei ist gleich vier. Und
egal, wie Sie sich entscheiden, sich zu kleiden, sich zu nennen oder Ihren
Körperbau zu verändern, es ändert nichts daran. Die traurige
Realität ist leider, dass sie im Zuge des Gasbeleuchtung-Prozesses,
der uns einer posthumanen Zukunft näher bringen soll, eine wachsende
Zahl von Kindern und Jugendlichen psychisch und physisch geschädigt
haben. Und es wird nur noch schlimmer. Das muß gestoppt werden.“
(Laura Aboli, „Transhumanismus: Das Endspiel“, 2023).
Lorikeet wrote:
„How often have I lambasted modern-Greeks for having been infected
by a foreign spiritual dogma, worshipping a foreign god?
They now associate their identity with two incompatible worldviews:
Christianity and Hellenism.“ **
I assume that in return you were downright picked on or ignored.
But in what way do you think that Hellenism is also incompatible? Let
me guess: You mean the fact that Hellenism adopted many elements from
the Orient and even subordinated itself to them. And that was a betrayal.
The intellectual-philosophical-religious path to Christianity - it went
geographically from East to West - was a path from, for example, Socrates,
Democritus, Aristippus (founder of the Cyrenaic, hedonistic school), Antisthenes
(founder of the Cynic school) and above all from Plato (founder of philosophy,
which means the striving for wisdom, and Platonism) and his followers
(Platonists) and from Aristotle and his followers (Peripatetics), Pyrrhon
and his followers (Sceptics), Epicurus and his followers (Epicureans),
Zeno and his followers (Stoics) to the Christian faith, which became the
Christian religion that turned cults into a church.
 
Lorikeet
wrote:
„So seductive is Christianity to the growing numbers of »spiteful
mutants«, as Dutton calls them - I call them Desperate Degenerates.“
**
Do you mean Edward Dutton?
An interesting man. But I can't agree with him in every respect. He
says that he can also distinguish between left-wingers and right-wingers
in terms of IQ. But that is very problematic, because neither can be determined
so clearly that they can be assigned to IQs without error. I, for example,
have a different view of left-wingers and right-wingers than he does.
More on this later (**|**).
Lorikeet wrote:
„Sheltering multiplies and compounds unfit genetic mutations,
increasing the numbers of the feeble and desperate who cannot endure
themselves, their own existence, without a plausible lie.
A lie that inverts reality, helping them cope.
This is why Christianity and Islam spread - Christianity = Judaism for
the pagans.
The slave dogma was so appealing that it threatened its core belief
claiming spiritual elitism.
This will be, for European man, the third extinction event.
The previous two sparked a rebirth ... what does not kill me ... and
all that, but what was left unsaid was:
It may kill me, and more significantly, what does not kill me may leave
me crippled, and may not, necessarily, make me stronger.“ **
These statements are similar to those of Nietzsche (written down in
the 19th century).
What will happen to Europeans this third time?
A third rebirth? A new strength? Crippling? Death?
You spoke of the „the third extinction event“.
But why are you so pessimistic?
After all, there are other possibilities.
Lorikeet wrote:
Quotes from that film:
„Being left wing is the major cause of sterility. If you look among
the most intelligent people: if they are left wing, they don’t have
children at all.“ (Edward Dutton, Why is IQ going DOWN?, 2022
).
„I’m a British imperialist, a 19th century British imperialist.
That's what I am.“ (Edward Dutton, Why is IQ going DOWN?,
2022 ).
„One of the things that makes us humans is that we struggle, we
have to struggle.“ (Edward Dutton, Why is IQ going DOWN?,
2022 ).
„I'm right wing!“ (Edward Dutton, Why is IQ going DOWN?,
2022 ).
„To keep the IQ as it is now, just as it is now, so it doesn't
go down further, ... you'd have to ensure that anybody below an IQ of
92, which is about a third of the population, didn't breed.“ (Edward
Dutton, Why is IQ going DOWN?, 2022 ).
„If you look at the left, the middle and the right in connection
with the progressive and the conservative, you have to admit that without
the conservative nothing works in life. Those who deny their origins
and do not want to be conserved are punished by life. Every living being
feeds on its origin (past) in both an evolutionary and historical sense.
**
The progressive is as uncertain as the future, the conservative as
certain as its origin (past). The fact that in wealth societies the
progressives form a majority over the conservatives has almost invariably
to do with their cultural beingness, which has brought about their prosperity,
and once this prosperity is achieved and continues to grow, then the
progressive is thereby appealed to and also continues to grow. Our occidental
economic »experts« believe that prosperity grows to the
heavens - which of course it cannot - and so many progressives also
believe that progress grows to eternity. And if they are not right-wing
but left-wing, not labour/achievers but greedy labour-deniers (achievement-deniers),
then they tend towards egalitarianism - read: communism - because it
promises everything to everyone and distributes stolen money and property
to those who believe in it and fights those who do not. Also, because
progressives, especially the work-/benefit-denying left progressives,
often expect and therefore demand more than the nevertheless perceivable
real world and real markets can offer them, they are very susceptible
to greed and envy and thus to egalitarianism because it promises them
redistribution. The conservatives, especially the right-wing conservatives,
are modest because they are down-to-earth, that is why they are very
realistically oriented and expect much less, demand much less than their
counterparts. The extremely overestimated importance of demand and consumption,
for example, by the Keynesians (**),
as well as the associated ignorance of the long term, are a very pleasant
matter for the progressives, who want to consume here and now, but a
huge evil for the conservatives. **
At the core, everyone is a conservative. (**).“
**
**
The classification is not easy; therefore the left-right issue should
also be excluded from the IQ statistics. There can be both left-wingers
and right-wingers for genetic reasons as well as for other reasons, i.e.
in all social classes.
„One can best understand my illustration if one first separates
oneself from all prejudices about the conservative, the progressive,
the right and the left and goes back to the basics. Plants and animals
are and also all humans up to the time of the Neolithic Revolution
and the beginning of writing and thus also of written history (i.e.:
the beginning of historical science) were never progressive and never
right or left, but always only conservative, because they firmly believed
that only the conservative ensured their survival and punished everyone
with death who rebelled against it. So there were always a few anti-conservatives,
but they had no chance of being realised until the time of the changes
just mentioned. Conservatism has been so dominant in about 98-99.99%
of human history, namely in their natural history (macro-history or
evolution), that nothing else was possible - this is what I meant when
I said: „At the core, everyone is a conservative“ (**|**).
But since the Neolithic Revolution and the beginning of writing,
and thus of written history, the anti-conservative has become more and
more dominant, first slowly, then faster, finally exponentially, and
soon called itself the progressive and also divided itself into right
and left. The only problem is that this cannot go on forever, because
it is not natural.
|
 |
|
Choose your politgeometrical position! |
You must always take this into account if you want to understand why
there can be right-wing conservatives and left-wing conservatives as
well as right-wing progressives and left-wing progressives. As I said,
the conservative and the progressive (anti-conservative) are opposites.
And the right and the left are also opposites. We think we know that
a progressive believes in progress - that is not entirely wrong either,
but still a progressive is first and foremost an anti-conservative.
He is more concerned with opposition than with the content of his belief
(ideology). There is always progress anyway. A left-wing progressive
is the progressive who is not so much anti-conservative as the progressive,
but is more specifically aligned against everything right-wing conservative.
All live from the opposites. That some of them believe in progress is
the theoretical part of it, the practice is directed against the opposition.
Now you can probably guess the rest: right-wing conservatives and left-wing
progressives, like right-wing progressives and left-wing conservaives,
are direct opponents. The only ones who do not attract any oppostion,
or, as you could also say, all opposition, are the middles.
A right-wing progressive goes with progress, but wants to control
others for himself and/or his group by using technical and scientific
progression and master morality, i.e. as a representative of the technically
and scientifically progressive master people, he wants to control the
rest, i.e. enslave the others, especially the left-wing conservative.
A left-wing progressive goes with progress, but wants to control others
for himself and/or his group by using technical and scientific progression
and slave morality, i.e. as a representative of the technically and
scientifically progressive slave people, he wants to control the rest,
i.e. enslave the others, especially the right-wing conservative. The
right-wing conservative goes along with the conservative, but wants
to control others for himself and/or his group by using conservative
values and master morality, i.e. as representative of the conservative
master people the rest, i.e. enslave the others, especially the left-wing
progressive. The left-wing conservative goes along with the conservative,
but wants to control others for himself and/or his groupby by using
conservative values and egalitarian morality, i.e. as representative
of the conservative egalitarian people the rest, i.e. enslave the others,
especially the right-wing progressive.
So we have for instance:
MOST CONSERVATIVE (PURELY
CONSERVATIVE): CONSERVATIVE.
SECOND MOST CONSERVATIVE: LEFT-WING CONSERVATIVE,
MIDDLE CONSERVATIVE, RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE.
THIRD MOST CONSERVATIVE: CONSERVATIVE LEFT,
CONSERVATIVE MIDDLE, CONSERVATIVE RIGHT.
MOST PROGESSIVE (PURELY
PROGRESSIVE): PROGESSIVE.
SECOND MOST PROGESSIVE: LEFT-WING PROGRESSIVE,
MIDDLE PROGRESSIVE, RIGHT-WING PROGRESSIVE.
THIRD MOST PROGESSIVE: PROGRESSIVE LEFT,
PROGRESSIVE MIDDLE, PROGRESSIVE RIGHT.
MOST MIDDLE (PURELY MIDDLE):
MIDDLE.
SECOND MOST MIDDLE: CONSERVATIVE MIDDLE
and PROGRESSIVE MIDDLE as well as LEFT-WING MIDDLE and RIGHT-WING MIDDLE.
THIRD MOST MIDDLE: MIDDLE CONSERVATIVE
and MIDDLE PROGRESSIVE as well as MIDDLE LEFT and MIDDLE RIGHT.
SPECIAL CASE EXREME LEFT: EXTREME LEFT
(LEFTISM).
MOST LEFT (PURELY LEFT):
LEFT.
SECOND MOST LEFT: CONSERVATIVE LEFT, MIDDLE
LEFT, PROGRESSIVE LEFT.
THIRD MOST LEFT: LEFT-WING CONSERVATIVE,
LEFT-WING MIDDLE, LEFT-WING PROGRESSIVE.
SPECIAL CASE EXTREME RIGHT: EXTREME RIGHT
(RIGHTISM).
MOST RIGHT (PURELY
RIGHT): RIGHT.
SECOND MOST RIGHT: CONSERVATIVE RIGHT,
MIDDLE RIGHT, PROGRESSIVE RIGHT.
THIRD MOST RIGHT: RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE,
RIGHT-WING MIDDLE, RIGHT-WING PROGRESSIVE.
There are more than these mentioned 39 examples. History is full of
them.
Like I said: the so-called »progressive« is the anti-conservative.
Nothing is as anti-human as the anti-conservative. The left, the right
and the middle are not as anti-human as the anti-conservative (»progressive«).
They would have to become very extreme to be able to participate in
at least one of the sides or the lower middle of the anti-conservative.
And indeed: communism and fascism (especially National Socialism) are
also anti-conservatives (»progressive«) because they are
»left-wing-progressives« of the extreme kind and »right-wing-„progressives«
of the extreme kind respectively. But the greatest enemies of humanity
are the pure »progressives«, because they are the most »progressives«
(most anti-conservatives). We can see this very well in the current
development. It shows us that in a historically short time man will
be replaced by machines with the aim of eliminating him for the most
part and making the rest completely dependent on the machines, before
this rest will also be eliminated. It does not get any more anti-human
than this! In his book »Der Untergang des Abendlandes«
(»The Decline of the West«), published in 1918
(I) and 1922 (II), Spengler already predicted that man is about to become
the slave of the machine. Others also said this later, but Spengler
was the first to say it and make it very explicit. Goethe (1749-1832)
already said this, but not so explicitly as later Spengler.
If the machines are much, much more intelligent in terms of the algorithms
of mental processes than the most intelligent human being and also than
all intelligent human beings put together, then human beings will have
returned to where they were before, when there was no writing and all
human beings had to be conservative (for natural and primitive
cultural reasons - they would not have survived otherwise). All humans
will be only conservative again (or already dead), because
the machines will have taken over the »progressive« (anti-conservative),
and again humans will have to be conservative (for almost the
same reasons as then - this time only as high civilisationals).“
**
**
As far as music is concerned, I am one of those who have learned to
only hear music, i.e. not to see it. But some recordings are also
really good to watch, e.g. Pink Floyd in Pompeii.
According to Schopenhauer himself the will is something similar to Kant’s
„Ding an sich“. It is something we neither understand nor can
comprehend. If someone interprets God into this something, he can do so,
but he cannot claim that Schopenhauer also said it.
The will is in nature, and it manifests itself in the body. Everyone
can feel it, experience it. According to Schopenhauer, there is no cause-effect
relationship between will and body, because acts of will and changes of
the body are a consummation in two areas: The body (and analogously the
entire world) is the objectification of the will, that is: the body (and
analogously the entire world) is the will that has become the representation,
whereby the stages of development of the world as representation correspond
to the stages of objectification of the will. All phenomena are nothing
but objectifications of the one will, which underlies the world as an
unknowable „Ding an sich“ (Kant). This will is an irrational
and blind urge (cp. theory of evolution [**]).
Lorikeet wrote:
„"Diversity" for dumb Americans, born and raised in
a culture-of-no-culture, that have no experience with real traditions,
is a concealment for uniformity of thinking.“ **
In this country-without-culture, the people - the so-called „Americans“
- are systematically dumbed down, e.g. Kropotkinized (to below IQ30).
Of course, in this country-without-culture, there are still such people
who resist this process of dumbing down, Kropotkinization, but the demographic
development is also going in the direction of dumbing down, so that the
Kropotkinized can rejoice, if they were able to understand it at all.
The other means of Americanism are the drugs, which it likes to have
produced abroad within the framework of „globalization“ and
has smuggled in via immigrants (for Soros’ sake), the wars, also
the economic wars (the blowing up of the Nord Stream pipeline by the NATO
leader USA was a - and not the first - act of war against a NATO ally),
through which a very few rich people become even richer, but the people-with-country-without-culture
poorer.
Europeans are allied with those who are destroying Europe and killing
Europeans. (So this also applies to European-Americans, European-Australians,
European-New-Zealanders and all others of European descent.)
Lorikeet wrote:
„Superficial, shallow diversity, used as a thin veneer to conceal
uniformity.
See, as long as you adopt Americanism you can pretend to be whatever
you like.
Culture, for dumb Americans is a product one buys, uses for a while
and then discards, replacing it with another.
Diversity, for dumb Americans - is restaurant selections with exotic
cuisines, strange garments and languages, trinkets they purchase on
their vacations and place on their bookshelves indicating how cultivated
they are.
In fact, Americans impose uniformity on the world.
They will sanction or bomb another nation if it does not adopt American
values and ideals.
Americans want uniformity, with a diverse cover ..., a facade.
They feel like they were chosen, like their Jewish overlords, to bring
'freedom' to the world, and they will bring it even if it means killing
everyone who resists.
Americans are liars, or ignorant.
See, what real diversity means is that every culture can practice
its traditions, in accordance with its values and ideals, but Americans
will have none of that.
Diversity, for these morons is a garment you put on, then change for
another.
One day you are a man, the next a woman.
One day you are white, the next black.
One day you feel like Szechuan the next you want Thai.
Funky clothes, strange music....incomprehensible languages, that's all
they know of diversity.
No spirit ..., all materialistic and hedonistic.
So, all must adopt the American model, their Woke agenda, their open
borders, open markets, or else.
This is how "diverse" they are.
As long as you follow their rules you can pretend to be whatever you
like...this is their "freedom".
Free-speech, only as long as you do not have a mass influence ..., because
then they will disappear you.
So, Europe must adopt the American model and import Blacks and Muslim
Semites, and become another Americanised shithole...because that's what
diversity is to them.
See Britain, France, Ireland ..., Sweden.
It doesn't matter if thousands of years of history and traditions are
reduced to a fashion trend, all will become Americanised.
America has no culture, no shared traditions ..., the closest they come
is thanksgiving, and the rest are holidays for selling product to dumb-Americans,
or used as an excuses to travel...as if traveling enlightens and cultures
them.
All America has is popsicles, pop-culture, pop-art, pop-music ...,popular
..., what can easily be controlled and exploited.
A shallow place full of shallow people. Nice, the way most shallow people
are.
Beer and sports on weekends...March breaks, and Black Fridays ..., hamburgers
and Disney tunes; endless discussion about sitcoms and Hollywood flicks...where
they bond as if they were truly unified.
They sit around discussing what happened in the latest episode of a
popular TV show, because they have nothing else to talk about.
They don't understand what cultural traditions mean because they've
never experienced them ...“ **
True. Unfortunately.
They allegedly live in „God’s own country“, in
reality in the „devil’s own hell“, from which they cannot
see reality, but only the alleged reality: „God’s own
country“.
Most of them are incorrigible optimists (= cowards, hypocrites).
They are forced to do so because they have no culture, no tradition.
For those of European descent - by far the largest ghroup, the mass -
any real reference to their origins is taboo, because it is „evil“.
And even if it were not taboo, they would no longer be able to establish
a real relationship with their origins, because it is already too late
for that: they have long since identified with „culture-without-culture“,
i.e. nothingness, their Americanism.
Lorikeet wrote:
„They don't understand what cultural traditions mean because
they've never experienced them...not even in the many travels visiting
local Americanised tourist enclaves that are designed to make them feel
as if they never left home.
They believe that they are on a cosmic mission to liberate mankind ...,
which is code for control humanity.
They can't stand true diversity...so they deny its very existence.
See them deny race and gender...some deny free-will altogether, converting
their messianic agenda into a cosmic end.
Anyone who resist is a Nazi, or a terrorist, like they are depicted
in Hollywood blockbusters ....or envious of their wealth and freedoms.
They got that from their Jewish overlords, as well.
A psychological method of silencing dissent.
Their idea of philosophy is talking politics ..., American politics.
They are the centre of the universe.
Going from LA to NY is like traveling to another culture ..., when it
is but another copy of the vacuous place they left.
These imbeciles want to tell me I deny diversity when I want to liberate
cultures from their Americanised uniformity.
Everyone should live in accordance with their own traditions, values,
ideals ..., not as copies of American imbeciles.“ **
Fortunately, there are still some who do not follow this ideology -
Americanism.
„How can well-to-do members of society be so stupid to spend so
much money on advertising only to confirm their belief in the stupidity
of others?“ (Hans-Georg Möller, Luhmann’s Media Theory:
The Specifics, 2023 ).
„Conclusion 1: The mass media supply society with a background
reality that it doesn't agrree on.“ (Hans-Georg Möller, Luhmann’s
Media Theory: The Specifics, 2023 ).
„Conclusion 2: The mass media make society restless and tense.“
(Hans-Georg Möller, Luhmann’s Media Theory: The Specifics,
2023 ).
„Conclusion 3: Their preference for moral communication can make
the mass media a catalyst of conflict.“ (Hans-Georg Möller,
Luhmann’s Media Theory: The Specifics, 2023 )
„Conclusion 4: The mass media make second-order observation the
common mode in which reality is constructed and identity is shaped.“
(Hans-Georg Möller, Luhmann’s Media Theory: The Specifics,
2023 )
According to Möller, the difference between Luhmann an earlier
philosophers of modernity is: modern thinkers emphazised a first person
prerspective; but in todays society, where the mass media have such a
strong presence: whatever we see, we see as being seen by someone; it is
no longer seeing what simply is there, but seeing what is shown to be
seen; in the 21st century, in the age of mass and social media, we need
to see and show ourselves as being seen.
Lucas Gage wrote:
„Why didn’t Hollywood show you this in their WWII movies?
They will answer this with another lie: „These people“ were
„forced by the colonial masters to participate“. In reality,
many of these people knew that the Nazis, who were not colonial masters
themselves (the German Empire lost its colonies in 1919 **),
had liberated them from colonial rule, because the Nazis had defeated
this peoples’s colonial masters (especially those of the British
Empire, French Empire, Soviet Empire).
The Nazis knew from their beginning exactly what kind of resistance
they would encounter from which people: mainly those who parasitically
commanded both hyper-capitalism and hyper-communism (Bolshevism). Hence
the name of their movement: National Socialism - as National it
turned against the hyper-communist „International“ („Proletarians
of all countries unite“), and as Socialism it turned against the
hyper-capitalist „International“ („Markets of all countries
unite“ - with the achievement of a global monopoly as the goal -
later, since about 1990, called „globalization“).
** Germany
lost its colonies in 1919 due to the Dictate of Versailles (also called:
„Konferenz Koscher“): „Which hand would not wither that puts
itself and us in these fetters?“ (Translated
by me; Philipp Heinrich Scheidemann, Social Democrat, SPD, May 12,
1919; source: Stenographische Berichte der Verhandlungen der Deutschen Nationalversammlung,
39. Sitzung, 12. Mai 1919, S. 1082-1084).
Lorikeet wrote:
„
The hypocrisy is astounding ....
Now it is coming to light.
Before it would have been ridiculed and cynically dismissed as conspiratorial
of anti-Semitic.
Empire in decline ..., this is why they are in a state of panic, starting
wars everywhere, desperate to maintain control of the narrative.
Hollywood is plummeting, due to losing money trying to promote Wokism
....
God Woke, go broke.
The US propaganda machinery isn't as dominant as it was ten years ago.“
**
Elon Musk’s reaction is interesting.
What do you know about him?
Lorikeet wrote:
„E. Michael Jones wrote:
»In spite of their control of the media, the Jews are losing
the battle for the public mind, proving that truth is not the opinion
of the powerful. In the long run, truth is the only thing that will
prevail.« **
And it is the history that shows us the truth.
That is the reason why lies are so often told just about history.
It is no coincidence that people say: „What dies first in a war is
the truth“.
Think about who you must not talk badly about, and you will immediately
know who is ruling you.
Lorikeet wrote:
„
It is brainwashing, yes, but it is less compared to the fact that there
is no longer a media outlet that tells the truth so that they can say
what they want, even that there are brainwashed people - they never report
on what harms their financial backers, but only on what benefits them
greatly. If the masses do not have a media for themselves - as it used
to be (not so long ago: state broadcasting, state press - all with an
educational mandate for the people) - then they are exposed to the media
of the very few, even if they see through their brainwashing and therefore
naturally reject it. Power over the media is crucial. And the media are
language, as are all digital data and money, for example. We are in a
time of total upheaval.
This upheaval is at least as strong as the one in the Neolithic: the
Neolithic Revolution. There was the time before the Neolithic Revolution,
the time after it, the time of the High Cultures, which is not yet over,
but will soon come to an end. Even if we cannot change this end of the
High Cultures, we should by no means voluntarily expose ourselves to total
destruction through artificial crises, and these artificial crises include,
for example, the destruction of the white race through mass immigration
into white countries, which has not only been taking place since yesterday.
Elon Musk wrote:
„The ADL unjustly attacks the majority of the West, despite the
majority of the West supporting the jewish people and Israel.
This is because they cannot, by their own tenets, criticize the minority
groups who are their primary threat.
It is not right and needs to stop.“
„If you are a Christian, you cannot be completely loyal to your
own people or your own nation, because your first loyalty is to Rome.
That was one of the reasons for the German Protestant reform to break
away from this loyalty to Rome.“ (Laurent Guyénaut).
Lorikeet (quoting Seethroughitall) wrote:
„Adam's Sin is What Made Humans Mortal, Repair that Sin = Immortality,
I'm Not Joking When I Say:
Judaism's Ultimate Goal is to become Immortal Androgynes Like the Original
Adam (Exact Image of God),
»Adam's Sin will be Repaired in Messianic Times«,
Returns the World to State of Eden.“ **
It is a mental illness. They want to go back to „their“ Adam,
who - allegedly - was a man and a woman at the same time, had an eternal
orgasm and eyes all around his head ( ).
And there are many steps, milestones and barriers along this way.
„These people are thick.“ (Adam Green ).
Adam?
Lorikeet wrote:
„Adam was Intersex (trans) before the Split. And According to
Judaism this was the "exact image" of God (their God).
The Splitting of Adam and eating from the Tree of Knowledge, was acquiring
the Knowledge of 2 genders and that Man and Woman could procreate.
Created become creators.“ **
Does the original Tora really say that Adam was both a man and a woman?
I learnt as a child that Adam was a man and Eve was a woman who tempted
him to sin
Is the Tora always renewed, i.e. changed? And what about the Old Testament
in this respect? It has always been said that they have never been changed
because they are not allowed to be changed.
From the information I have now received about the Tora, it is clear
that the Tora has been constantly changed, and that means that, contrary
to all other proclamations, it is not „eternally valid“ and
„holy“ after all.
Lorikeet (quoting Seethroughitall) wrote:
„If You Don't Believe Me Here is a Kabbalist Saying It:
"That Original Creature (Adam) was an Asexually Reproducing Creatur."
"This is the Creature that was made in the Exact Image of God."
().“
**
Unbelievable.
I believe that they invented this story in retrospect, namely soon after
transgender was invented.
Adam Green (in: Know More News) wrote:
„Who does Esau/Edom represent today, and what will happen to
them in the end times? Is your intention to convent Christians to Noahites?
Rabbis Fantasize About the Destruction of America ....
(Examples: »Esau, who became Edom, who became the Roman empire,
which metamorphosed into the Christian empire, which became Christian
civilization, which is now represented by the United States of America.«
»The Edomites are the Descendents of Edom, who is also known as
Esau, Jacob’s evil twin, our tradition tells us, that the Edomites
are the ancestors of the Romans and indeed of all Europeans and the
entire Christian world.« »Christianity is Edom.« »Edom
is the father of Rome, wht will later become the Roman empire.«
»Reagrading Esau, Edom, we stress their concrete destruction and
that God willo throw them into the endless pit of darkness and oblivion.«
»The descendents of our people that were enemies to our people
from the first day are still hating us, in the commandment ot their
ancestors. The children of Esau that hates Jacob, the children of Amalek
that hates Jacob, the children of all that ones that had that black
bitterness instead of a soul, that black, dark, horrible, depressed,
negative and awful shadow as a poor replacement for a soul is still
hating us, still jealous, still don’t know what to do with our
goodness.« »Christianity must be utterly destroyed, and
that is how the full force of the messianic age will arrive.«
»I am just describing you a devine formular.«).“ **
They are full of envy, jealousy, revenge, especially blood revenge,
whereby blood here stands for the religious spirit (a meme) of a religious
nation which, by referring to values that do not shy away from any crime,
wants to impose its will on all other people in this world.
Adam Green (in: Know More News) wrote:
„Ben Shapiro's community, 'Right wing conservative religious
Rabbis' are eagerly awaiting and encouraging the annihilation of the
'West' according to their prophecies of vengeance.
(Examples: »Europe, Christianity will be totally destroyes.
So I ask you: Is it a good news that Islam invades Europe? It's an excellent
news. It means the coming of the Messiah. Excellent news.« »You
will dearly pay for it, Europeans! To such an extent! You have no idea!
And you will have no place to run to! Because all the evil you have
done to Israel, you will pay for it a hundredfold! When Italy will be
gone, when Edom (that is why the Christiantiy’s headquarter, which
come from there, is there, when that place will be gone, and that is
what the Islam is going to do, Islam is the broom of Israel, you have
to know it ....«)“ **
They speak af is they have an IQ of only 44 or less (like Kropotkin).
They also believe in reincarnation. For example, after Yasser Arafat's
death, 200 rabbis from Piqquach Nefesh („juridical“ term: control
of a soul) labelled him the „Amalek of our generation“ and suggested
celebrating the anniversary of his death (11.11.) as a day of rejoicing.
For them, reincarnation means „role of a soul“. And Amalek is
according to them the grandson of Esau, Jacob’s evil twin (see above).
Everyone and anyone who is against them is Amalek. This is below kindergarten
„rhetoric“, but more dangerous than any and all other inhumanes.
Emily Goldstein wrote:
„Yes, Diversity Is About Getting Rid Of White People (And That’s
A Good Thing). Diversity is indeed White genocide. And White genocide
is exactly what the world needs more than anything else.“ **
Emily Goldstein wrote:
„
Lorikeet wrote:
„
Lorikeet wrote:
„
Anyone who is anti-white is a racist. Anyone who wants to kill all white
people wants to become a mass murderer.
Lorikeet wrote:
„Humanize wrote:
»I can show you the world
Shining shimmering splendid!
Tell me lorket, now when did you
Last let your heart decide?
I can open your eyes
Take you wonder by wonder
Over sideways and under
On a magic truth ride
A whole new world!
A new fantastic point of view!
No one to tell us false
Or confuse us
Or say we're only brains in vats
A whole new world!!
A metaphysical place I never knew
And now from way up here
Its crystal clear
That now I'm in a whole new world
With you« **
You are a walking cliche....
Disney lyrics?
Humburglar, if I'm a "racist" then so are you, otherwise
you can enlighten us as to how our positions differ on race.
If anything, it'll give you an opportunity to prove, once more, how
clueless you are, a fact supported by your positions on diversity.
The quip "how's that working out for you" is truly American
..., and it exposes what you think about truth ..., that it must always
benefit you, otherwise it isn't true.“ **
This - „that it must always benefit you, otherwise it isn't true“
- reminds me of WASP and its history:
White Anglo-Saxon Protestantism => Utilitarianism => Cant (hypocrisy)
=> Adaptation to the hostile in the foreign (identification with the
foreign aggressor who is actually the enemy), which leads to a hostile
attitude towards one’s own group, its tradition, etc..
White Anglo-Saxon Protestantism („if I am successful, then God
has willed it that way; if I am not successful, then God has willed it
that way“) => Utilitarianism („the only right thing is what
benefits me, what brings me success“) => Cant („if others
are not willed by God, then I simply hypocritically pretend a lot to them,
and if I am successful with that, then God has willed it that way too“).
And always think positively, always be an optimist (coward).
Lorikeet wrote:
If race is not a social construct but a product of natural selection,
which it is, and if 'diversity is a strength' then how can you not contradict
yourself by supporting the influx of legal or not, mostly male Mestizos,
sub-Saharan Africans, Muslim Berbers and Semites from America's southern
borders?
I guess all that diversity is strengthening the US by lowering its median
IQ.....it is 'culturally enriching' your lack of culture.
But your cluelessness is most evident on what you think my positions
on change are.
Change happens, it is how we experience existence. We don't need to
support it for it to continue.
I suspect you meant social change...and you being a "progressive"
believe all change is good, and that society is moving towards increasingly
better systems.
In which case, America's future looks bright, to you and your kind.
A US where whites are 30% of the population and the rest are Mestizos,
and African blacks, and Semite Muslims should not be feared ..., because
change is always good, and you don't fear change.
But you'll be dead by then.“ **
Of course. Beaten to death.
And because that is too negative, a WASP has to reinterpret it into
a positive.
His cowardice (optimism) forces him to adapt to the aggressor (Stockholm
syndrome).
And: U.S.-Americanism is the extreme WASP extension. This already started
with the lie of „God’s own country“ and the circumcision
of its Protestants.
This U.S.-Americanism has meanwhile infected the entire West.
„We should stop this absolut self-destruction of the West. ....
We - Western Europe - and modern United States should not be afraid
to develop a certain pride in our tradition.“ (Slavoj Zizek, in:
Festival INDIGO, Peter Sloterdijk & Slavoj Zizek, 6. Oktober
2023 ).
However, it must not remain merely theoretical („philosophical“),
but must become more practical, more real, more factual.
Perhaps we should remove everything Hellenistic and Christian from our
Western tradition. There is more than enough left!
An increasing number of whites has already turned its back on Christianity.
„Christianity is not pro-white, it is anti-white. And it’s
been terrible for whites. It was about conquering the Graeco-Roman European
world, initially, when it was created. .... Christianity is dropping dramatically
among Europeans and growing rapidly around for non-whites.“ (Adam
Green ).
But I don’t know whether Wotan, Thor, Donar, Freia, Zeus, Jupiter,
Aphrodite, Venus and other gods are already more welcome again. Perhaps
they are.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I am not sure whether Christianity was invented in order to make it
an antithesis in the Hegelian sense, thus an opponent (and that it, by
the way, got later Islam as an opponent- second antithesis), but that
from today’s point of view it is only interpreted in retrospect in
such a way, so that it fits, because it can only be interpreted in this
sense for a historically relatively short time (only after the end of
the Second World War). They have been changing their allegedly „holy“
texts. I believe that they always go according to what has just happened
(recent history) and then change the text in the Tora accordingly, but
only if necessary.
So, maybe that Saul was an ancient special agent, so that he changed
his name to Paul and championed Christianity in order to weaken the Roman
Empire, so that the Romans could become and later indeed became Christians
and therefore Zion worshippers, i.e. worshippers of the God of the chosen
people, the God of Israel, and maybe that the Roman Christians became
the first self-hating whites who destroyed the statues and other images
of their own ancestors in a way that is strikingly similar to the manner
of today’s „Antifa“ (Adam Green ).
But by the beginning of the Middle Ages at the latest, this could no
longer have been the case, because of the independence of Christianity
(except in some certian European regions). This only changed when Western
culture became decadent (just like the Romans were back then), disregarded
its values, and soon even trampled underfoot. Since then, such an agent
activity has been worthwhile again.
In any case, a proponent of the thesis that Christianity has never been
anything other than a geostrategic object would have to provide more rigorous
evidence. To refer to the sources of old texts is problematic if they
have been changed again and again and are therefore possibly not old at
all.
Nevertheless, Christianity was and is a problem for whites. But actually,
it is Americanism that has the most damaging effect on all whites.
Lorikeet wrote:
„
Hmmmm ..., I wonder why ....“ **
There’s a system behind it. It’s certainly not old yet. 
Lorikeet wrote:
„Miscegenation is a war on specific populations - Europeans -
because they are the real threat to Globalization, or Americanism.“
**
Europeans are the real threat to them, because Europeans are the most
intelligent and therefore also the wealthiest (richest) people (it’s
about hundreds of trillions of dollars) among all nations, cultures, races
on this planet and are therefore to be mixed, destroyed, exterminated:
Genocide.
This is no longer disputed by them: Racists!
Lorikeet wrote:
„No, Europeans are the most resistant to authority....including
natural order, making them 1innovators.....but also individualistic.“
**
Yes. At least, I hope so.
But why, since around the 1960s, have we been experiencing - slowly
and weakly at first, then quickly and strongly - a similar story to that
of ancient Greece and later the entire Roman Empire? They began to betray
their traditions, to hate themselves and to follow a religion that was
completely alien to them, while rejecting and soon forgetting their own
religion. We are experiencing the same scenario today - with the exception
of forgetting, because we have not yet forgotten the religion that many
have already rejected. (Perhaps we should regard
our very own religion - the pagan one - as a thesis, the religion imposed
on us by force as an antithesis and the new religion soon to be implemented
as a synthesis, which confirms the thesis and does not cast out the antithesis,
but clearly rejects it. All old churches must be carefully preserved -
as a reminder and a warning.)
I believe that what we are currently experiencing could be a rather
helpless, or at least fear-based, defense of the representatives and rulers
of the old order. Much looks like it, especially the tendency towards
war, anarchy and chaos. Of course, there may also be a broader strategy
behind it. I always consider this possibility. But if it is not this broader
strategy, but the rather helpless, or at least fear-based, defense of
the representatives and rulers of the old order that we are currently
experiencing, then the prospects for us are not bad.
|
Huntingtons Kulturkreise
und Weltpolitik: Potentielle
Konfliktbildungen.
Von Huntingtons 7 - 8 Kulturen sind
3 - 4 nicht eindeutig zuzuordnen oder
existieren (noch) gar nicht (**)
! |
|
Huntingtons
Struktur eines
Bruchlinienkrieges.
d = „Diaspora“
|
Lorikeet wrote:
„When a unipolar world collapses, it fragments into multipolarity.
A temporary state, before the process towards unipolarity begins anew.
We are in a cycle when nation-states are becoming obsolete, as did
city-states.
The age of superstates is beginning, roughly aligned with Huntington's
"clash of cultures." Each representing a culture with its
own traditions, values, and ways of dealing with multicultural, multiracial,
populations - and its own way of dealing with unfit genetic mutations,
such as transexuality, homosexuality, paedophilia, etc.
America's method has faield ..., its melting pot, dilution of biological
identifiers into ideological cohesion, is a farce dependent no lies:
a gullible, dumbed-down, populace.“ **
Yes, but that too could be part of an overarching strategy. Sure, Americanism
has failed - anyone who is not yet a a Kropotkinized could have predicted
that -, and the so-called „fault line conflicts (wars)“ (Huntington)
have been around for a long time. But why then are XI, Modi, Putin and
other Non-Westerners participating in the still active order of the West?
They are all constantly present at Klaus Schwab’s WEF and also implement
all the measures of the digital-financial complex, usually even faster
than the West itself.
Let’s wait and see.
|
Kommentare zu Kommentaren im Weltnetz 
“ **
