>"There is a trait in the Jewish character that does

File: 1500456179141268763.jpg (114KB, 1000x1192px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 1000x1192px

>In an effort that was hushed up until today, Dahl’s world-renowned children’s books were heavily edited to remove content that expressed his contempt for women, blacks, the disabled, and other groups Dahl enjoyed marginalizing, often with over-the-top stereotypes.

>Even “Matilda,” that super-rare Dahl book with a heroic female lead, was actually about a “devilish little hussy,” until editor Stephen Roxburgh removed Dahl’s woman-hating content from the original manuscript. “The Witches” and “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” also received extreme makeovers to cut back on misogynist and racist content, respectively. Dahl once memorably called Cinderella a “dirty slut.”

It's like that somethingawful parody of Brian Jacques where his editor asked him to stop calling moles "niggers." What do you think the original manuscripts read like?

>>10017735
Wow. Childhood ruined.

>>10017735
>that somethingawful parody of Brian Jacques
I hadn't read that before, it's fantastic. Thanks.
http://www.somethingawful.com/news/bargain-book-bin-3/

File: 18b.gif (809KB, 165x115px) Image search: [Google]

809KB, 165x115px

>An unhappy and bullied little boy, in adulthood he longed for the kind of dominance he never achieved as a child. Even from his earliest days, he was a hateful little fuck. He began one prep school essay, "Sometimes there is a great advantage in traveling to hot countries, where niggers dwell. They will give you many valuable things."

>In Jeremy Treglown's biography of Roald Dahl he reports that according to a friend, Dahl said:
>I am all fucked out. That goddamn woman has absolutely screwed me from one end of the room to the other for three goddam nights. I went back to the Ambassador this morning, and I said, "You know it's a great assignment, but I just can't go on." And the Ambassador said, "Roald, did you ever see the Charles Laughton movie of Henry VIII?" And I said "Yes." "Well," he said, "do you remember the scene with Henry going into the bedroom with Anne of Cleves, and he turns and says 'The things I've done for England'? Well, that's what you've got to do."

>>10017502
> I mean, there's always a reason why anti-anything crops up anywhere

Anti-anything groups are usually whiny faggots.
As for his antisemitism, Dahl was considered by his peers to be an inconsistent and emotional man whose opinions varied from one minute to the next.

File: wew.png (2MB, 1687x602px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1687x602px

Jesus Christ, Raimi

>His reaction to the fatwa against Salman Rushdie ensured his knighting would never occur, for he wrote to The Times of London that the man was "a dangerous opportunist." (His real jealousy likely oriented around the fact that Rushdie had won a Booker Prize and he hadn't.) People started to distance themselves from the old man in droves. When Martin Amis told Dahl he was about to have dinner with Rushdie, Dahl responded, "Tell him he's a shit."

Who was in the wrong here?

>>10017793
RUSHDIE A SHIT! A SHIT!!

>>10017502
Hitler was a nice person that loved children.

File: 1389306187894.png (62KB, 699x704px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 699x704px

>>10017735
>taken from the Times of Israel

>>10017793
Rushdie is a hack

Dahl was literally brain-damaged

>>10017502
I attended the same secondly school as him
none of this surprises me

>>10018113
Is it the sort of place that nurtures bigots?

>>10018127
>one of the better British private schools

File: hulkjew.jpg (86KB, 420x389px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 420x389px

This is the standard, common opinion of Jews, and everyone knows it. The kicker is that Jews think the solution is to suppress it, and to use their (empirically true) positions of power and influence in society to enforce that suppression. What they don't realize is that the SENTIMENT IS BORN OF EXACTLY THAT BEHAVIOR.

A minority of chauvinistic Jews really fuck it up for the rest of them, by playing to the natural human chauvinism of any threatened in-group, and steering that group in the direction of more and more chauvinism. Jews in France and Germany before WW1 were headed toward total integration. Now the whole thing is locked in a death spiral between a minority of obsessive anti-semites and a minority of obsessive ADL type Jews.

>>10017783
>literally chocolate people who make chocolate

Clever.

>>10018176

ever vigilant

>publishing houses Jewish
>Complains about related workplace experience

>>10018176
>This is the standard, common opinion of Jews

Lol, most people don't even care.

>>10018217
try working in a law firm for a few years or being in a well to do country club

>>10017793
>his real jealousy
Lol, these fucking people

File: dahl writing hut.jpg (378KB, 1769x1769px) Image search: [Google]

378KB, 1769x1769px

>>10017502
>>10017735
What a lad.

Comfy as well, he had a writing hut/neet cave where he wrote in an armchair under a blanket.

>>10017735
>It's like that somethingawful parody of Brian Jacques where his editor asked him to stop calling moles "niggers."

Reading this was as funny as reading the original article for some reason.

>>10018222
>standard, common opinion
Most people don't work in law firms or belong to a country club, anon. People hate rich Jews, wow, no shit. Just like lots of people hate lucrative industries (law, medicine, business, tech giants) in general. Most people have met like 0-3 Jews dude.

>>10018222
>try working in a law firm for a few years or being in a well to do country club
>This is the standard, common opinion of Jews
?

>>10018269
Yes because Jews tend to congregate in major urban environments, where money and vice just happen to be concentrated. And there they use their usurious skills and general disregard for God's non-chosen people, the Goyim, to climb whatever ladders of power they can and then pulling it up behind them for non-Jews.

>>10017502
Some sort of radicalism is /lit/. Antisemitism is very /lit/.

>>10018292
Look man I disagree with your bullshit but that's not the point. I'm talking about whether your far-right views are common, and they're honestly not, except on 4chan and probably in your peer groups. Does that distinction make sense in your little stormfag mind, faggot? I'm not going to be persuaded by your cartoonish belief that a group which is genetically like 60-80% white are somehow magically attracted to law firms because they evolved for hundreds of thousands of years to be office rats in their ancestral deserts of Palestine. I don't care, I've heard it all before and I used to believe it myself. That's not the point. The point is that 4chan is not representative of the majority.

>>10018333
Of course they're not. My conservative, virtuous and frankly wise perspective can only be shared by those who have the effort to transcend their beastly origins. And thanks to your Jewish allies, the growing mulatto underclass which will soon replace the fair and once-noble Whites are destined to toil away with their limited mental capacity and baboon-like impulses forever ignorant of the hook-nosed, beady-eyed moral lepers who profit from the squalid mundanity of their existence.

>I don't care, I've heard it all before and I used to believe it myself

Yeah, sure you did Haim. I have made zero claims that 4chan represents anything beyond itself you dumb kike. I thought you people were supposed to be G-d's chosen intellectuals? You don't seem very adept at comprehending basic English.

>>10018368
>mullato slaves are somehow a feasible conspiracy theory despite automation being far quicker to happen than universal racemixing possibly could
>everyone who disagrees with me is jewish

This is why most people think you're paranoid retards. Most of us don't really spend that much time thinking about Jews, anon. Sorry to break it to you.

>>10018269
>>10018277
The point is that insofar people have an opinion of Jews, insofar as their mind categorizes Jews separately, they have that opinion.

Incidentally, now you have average schmucks who are completely disconnected from this casual antisemitism of the gentile social elites, but they hate Jews because of Israel. You'd be surprised how "folk"-antisemitic blacks and hispanics are, and how they selectively wield SJW anger against AIPAC while dismissing "shhhh that's antisemitic!" pushback as part of the white/Jew establishment.

The world is becoming a very hostile place for Jews again. Like, very very hostile.

File: c0088e47577bd2f9fbfdf640fd55fe4e.jpg (53KB, 564x682px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 564x682px

>>10018368
>literally a cliché

>>10018368
>their limited mental capacity and baboon-like impulses forever ignorant of the hook-nosed, beady-eyed moral lepers who profit from the squalid mundanity of their existence
you are so wrong, visit any rap site and you have black people complaining about them jewish producers.

>>10018444
>The world is becoming a very hostile place for Jews again. Like, very very hostile.

And yet again they will portray themselves as an oppressed and powerless minority despite their vast over-representation in any industry which affords them power and wealth regardless of its moral status. Just look at Sweden. It has gone from a 95%+ White country to a country which is projected to be majority non-White by 2051. And who owns Sweden's largest TV station TV4? Which ethno-racial group does the academic who most aggressively calls for more refugees while refusing to accept they commit disproportionate amount of crimes (especially the rape of white Swedish women)? Who owns several of the largest newspapers in that country (Aftonbladet etc)? Who was responsible for promoting mass immigration to Sweden as early as the 1950s? Which ethno-religious group does the academic who has lectured far and wide about how Sweden lacks any distinct culture of its and requires mass immigration in order to attain one? Who owns the largest publishing house in that country? Who has a large stake in the largest radio station? Who is the head of the largest Nordic bank?

I guarantee you, these people all have one very unfortunate thing in common but it certainly isn't that they are all persecuted minorities.

>>10018244
fucking scandis and their cuck sheds

File: low_quality_bait.jpg (16KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 600x600px

Obvious /pol/ bait is obvious

>>10018460
Perhaps a minority of Niggers appreciate, as best as their primitive minds allow, the vague notion that Jews are somehow profiting from their labour within the music industry in a way that is rather sinister, but the Jews understand full-well that importing hundreds of thousands of low IQ Niggers into a developed White country isn't going to make those Niggers any more civilised than a pitbull who is adopted by a [collective noun] of swans. It will simply distract Whites away from the Jews while creating a mongrel mulatto underclass which will slowly grow larger like raw sewage being pumped into a pristine lake. Niggers will never possess the capacity to do anything about their enemies even if they wanted to. They are poorly organised hoard of monkeys whose primary instincts compel them to destroy their surroundings and satisfy their libidos. They are nothing without the White man.

>>10017758
Holy fuck this is hilarious

File: baruch-spinoza.jpg (85KB, 710x686px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 710x686px

>>10018498

Naziism and racialism are such tedious philosophies. You are exactly as bad as the Communists in your own way. Both of you are godless materialistic philosophies which reduce all the phenomena in the universe to base matter. Permit me to illustrate.

Nazi or racialist materialist: "Nothing can help the black man. He is innately inferior."

Communist or socialist materialist: "The black man can only be helped by changing his environment for the better. Therefore we need to implement socialist programs to "make" him better.

Freethinking dualist: "Neither genetics nor environment "makes" us who we are, because all men have an immaterial and immortal soul. Genetics versus environment is a false dichotomy produced by a godless age. The black man will improve when he chooses to improve himself. Men and nations rise or fall by their virtue or their vice."

Again:

Freethinking patriot: “I want my country to be strong and great, but it will only be strong and great if we earn it. Blood does not determine destiny. All men have a soul and virtue alone makes a distinction among men. Our own moral decadence is killing the West. The West too was barbarous once. Fundamentally we need a spiritual revival of ourselves. Mass immigration and multiculturalism should be resisted, and traitors should be deported, but good people of colour already resident here should not be persecuted or forcibly removed.”

Racialist or Neo-Nazi: “Kick out all NIGGERS and KIKES and the world would be a paradise. IQ TESTS. SKULL SHAPES. EUGENICS. CENSORSHIP. BOOK-BURNING. PROPAGANDA. VIOLATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL. HEIL HITLER.”

Likewise this deterministic obsession with blood purity and Jews on the one hand and leftwing grievance-mongering and socialism on the other instead of attention to moral character as the root cause of the trouble is simply another symptom of the West's decline. Sir John Glubb has shown in his "Fall of Empires" that mass immigration, radical feminism, sexual degeneracy etc. are a feature of all civilizations in a state of decline.

http://people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf

Classical Greece had a proto-world-war called the Peloponnesian war (431 - 404 B. C.) and brought itself to ruin both by its decadence and its internecine strife long before there was a single Jew in Europe (the first mention of them being there is in the 3rd century B. C.). Degeneracy of all kinds ran wild there; bloody and needless wars between the Greek states were constantly going on. It was conquered by Macedon, Rome, and at last the Ottomans: this was because it had torn itself to pieces and collapsed into a mere shadow of its former self. So, there is proof positive for you that Jews are not singly responsible for the decline and fall of white nations. One of the greatest white peoples in history destroyed themselves long before there was a single Jew to be seen.

Britons and Germans were nothing before the Roman man came along either.

>>10018176
>Jews think the solution is to suppress it

Jews are semitic middle easterners, and the notion that you should have free anything (speech, press, or society in general) is one that cones purely from the ideals of the white man. Whites think other races hold these ideals and universally desire such things, but this is false. And it should come as no surprise that as jews obtain power they actively try to destroy white ideals and suppress any criticism of their behavior.

>>10018536

Freedom of speech is not some sort of innate white quality. It was a hard-won fight to get it on the part of a small number of great men over the millennia, and most of the intellectuals initially involved in the struggle were Englishmen, Romans, and Greeks. If not for the efforts of men like John Milton you would have no free speech. Continental Europe was absolutely destitute of it before the French Revolution. Were the Index Librorum Prohibitorum and the Inquisition Jewish? Did Jews burn William Tyndale at the stake?

>>10018425
Most people don't know what the hell is going on and go along with what they're told. That's no argument and those people will fall in line and therefore don't matter. Other anon is right. Be a stupid, uninformed piece of cattle all you want, but expect to be made fun of when you boast about it.

>>10018547
Freedom of speech is something only white men are willing to fight for and enact. Other races don't care about it.

>>10017502
looks like a redpilled alain the bottom

>>10018562
This is among the stupidest shit I've ever read in my life.
Please elaborate. Tell me how no black, brown, red, or yellow man in the history of the world has ever given the least bit of a fuck about free speech.

>>10018444
>The point is that insofar people have an opinion of Jews, insofar as their mind categorizes Jews separately, they have that opinion.
Most people don't have "opinions about Jews". They categorize Jews separately like they do for any designation, but most people don't care one way or another. You just assume this is common to validate yourself.

>they hate Jews because of Israel
Criticizing Israel is a separate thing from hating Jews. But guess what? Your average Joe doesn't really think about Israel much. Like, at all.

>You'd be surprised how "folk"-antisemitic blacks and hispanics are, and how they selectively wield SJW anger against AIPAC while dismissing "shhhh that's antisemitic!" pushback as part of the white/Jew establishment.
Yeah, this shit is totally something that the average person encounters in their everyday life. I can't walk into a supermarket without running into black nationalists that tell me about how much they hate Jews while selectively manipulating my anger to silence me or something. Happens every day.

>The world is becoming a very hostile place for Jews again. Like, very very hostile.
The world has never really been friendly to them, but I don't think the majority cares like they did in the past. It's just that Jews are such a small minority that it only takes a small amount of antisemites relative to the general population to affect them. Even in Nazi Germany most people didn't want to exterminate Jews, they just didn't know enough or care about what was going on to them.

>>10018562

Again, you say "white men" when you really mean a small number of great intellects whose ideas gained traction over the course of millennia. Europeans were slaves until the Renaissance began to spread Greek and Roman ideals and the Enlightenment and the French Revolution, English ones over the continent. And yet amusingly I have seen Neo-Nazis call the French Revolution, which overthrew the horrors of censorship, suppression of free speech, lettres de cachet, the Edict of Fontainebleau etc. etc. "Jewish" (without a scrap of evidence, of course---I simply highlight this hypocrisy and absurdity and Janus-faced-ness in thought).

>>10018575

Baruch Spinoza was an ardent defender of free speech in the 17th century. It is pretty ironic that his was the very picture I used in this post. >>10018522

>>10018575
You're the stupid one here. It doesn't exist and has never existed in non-white countries, whereas in nearly every white country (until recently under jewish power) it's been held and right and high value.

>>10018552
I know perfectly well what you think is going on, I just disagree that it really is.

>>10018547
Did you know writers such as Burke saw the liberalism of the French Revolution as a threat to liberty? It's not obvious why, but they indeed did:
>The fact is that what is now called “liberal democracy” refers not to the traditional Anglo-American constitution but to a rationalist reconstruction of it that has been entirely detached from the Protestant religion and the Anglo-American nationalist tradition. Far from being a time-tested form of government, this liberal-democratic ideal is something new to both America and Britain, dating only from the mid-twentieth century. The claim that liberal-democratic regimes of this kind can be maintained for long without the conservative principles they have blithely discarded is a hypothesis now being tested for the first time. Those who believe that a favorable outcome of this experiment is assured draw this conclusion not from historical or empirical evidence, for we have none. Rather, their confidence derives from the closed Lockean-rationalist system that holds them captive, preventing them from being able to anticipate any of the other quite possible outcomes before us.
https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2017/05/what-is-conservatism/

>>10018536
The "ideals of the white man" come from middle eastern religions.

>>10018582
>a small number of great intellects
... who were white men. Greeks and Romans are European too.

>>10018603
What? You mean Christianity? Even that has probably come to be more European in its values than jewish, but I'm no defender of Christianity because it is not our own and has negatively impacted more than it has benefited European peoples, as it was designed to do.

File: 1500427551381.gif (187KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 320x240px

>>10018585
I actually agree with almost everything in that post, but I fail to see how "this white man advocated free speech" equates to "no non-white man has ever desired free speech."
>>10018586
The fact that countries outside the west haven't successfully implemented it does not mean their citizens don't care. People fucking die in places like China attempting to push for reform on these kinds of freedom. Free speech in America has not been sought out and defended exclusively by whites either. You've never fought for it or anything else in your life, you chubby stormfag fuck.

>>10018603
>The "ideals of the white man" come from middle eastern religions.

Or from the Enlightenment, which, as someone else pointed out, the far-right also claim had sinister Semitic roots.

>>10018586

>whereas in nearly every white country (until recently under jewish power) it's been held and right and high value

I just now demonstrated to you that this is untrue. It was a Greco-Roman ideal that was absent in Europe for 1,000 years during the Dark Ages and only spread abroad by the efforts of a select few great men like Voltaire and Milton.

File: Bydgoszcz_1939_Polish_priests_and_civilians_at_the_Old_Market.jpg (66KB, 640x418px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 640x418px

>>10018625
>I'm no defender of Christianity because it is not our own and has negatively impacted more than it has benefited European peoples, as it was designed to do

Spoken like a true Nazi.

>>10018627
East Asians top the polls in their willingness to abolish free speech. That only enhances my argument, since blacks and most brown people aren't smart enough to even conceptualize it, and therefore obviously shouldn't be expected to care, which they of course don't, regardless of your stupid insistence that they do.

>>10018333
>cartoonish belief that a group which is genetically like 60-80% white are somehow magically attracted to law firms because they evolved for hundreds of thousands of years to be office rats in their ancestral deserts of Palestine
even jews themselves admit that the importance of the law and interpreting the written word in their religion has translated into success in the legal profession. seriously, judaism as a religion basically boils down to the experience of god through understanding the Laws passed down in holy words. when moses met god on sinai he was given a set of laws; the talmud is the largest jewish holy scripture and it's a collection of laws and interpretations of texts. after thousands of years of essentially being lawyers in their own religion, it's perfectly natural for them to apply these same skills to secular law practices, especially considering that in the US the law has historically been more progressive in allowing minorities to practice.

i'm pretty partial to jews (especially for 4chan standards) but i'll readily admit that they've become far too influential in manipulating the media and legal establishment. any genetic reason for this is hogwash, but it's easy to see how a group that values education and success would take advantage of whatever gains various industries allowed them and then rig the game in their favor once they had a large enough influence. i don't think there was ever a consolidated effort to take over the media or law, but once these relatively progressive industries allowed Jews in, they were able to use them to gain political power

>>10018629
Even if I agree with this assessment, why was it absent? Because of a jewish ideology, another example of which is pervading our society now and eroding the concept of free speech.

>>10018631
There hasn't been a notsee in 70 years, you complete idiot.

>>10018575
LOL

File: 1505268268567.jpg (125KB, 744x1024px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 744x1024px

>>10018608

My point is that it was thousands of years before Roman and Greek civilization brought the peoples of Northern Europe out of abject barbarian. You will not be able to name for example a single scientist or artist living within the confines of modern Britain and Germany between 2000 B. C. and 300 A. D. The tribes were constantly making war on one another other too and many practised cannibalism.

Britain was conquered in 43 A. D. and I am not aware of any man of genius that came from that place during the three centuries following. Australia was first colonized in 1788, and David Unaipon, an Australian Aboriginal man of genius, was born in 1872, less than 100 years later. He was "known as the Australian Leonardo da Vinci for his mechanical ideas," which included included "a centrifugal motor, a multi-radial wheel and a mechanical propulsion device."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Unaipon

>>10018648

The tyranny of the Emperors like Caligula and Nero, the tyranny of men like Draco and Phalaris had absolutely nothing to do with Jews. On the contrary the Bible is very favourable to freedom of speech. What is a chief lesson of the Old Testament? That the god-sent prophets who upbraided the people for their vices and told them the truth were censored and put to death for their pains.

>>10018650
Then how did Trump get elected?

File: 1504903201471.jpg (311KB, 1199x921px) Image search: [Google]

311KB, 1199x921px

>>10018608

P. S. General Alexandre Dumas is an example of a contradiction to your stance. He was half-black, and one of the most eminent generals in Napoleon's army, which was fighting (upon the whole) for liberty and freedom of speech as opposed to despotism and arbitrary power. "Once, when near Lisle, Dumas, with four men, attacked a post of fifty Austrians, killed six, and made sixteen prisoners. For a long time he commanded a legion of horse composed of blacks and mulattoes, who were the terror of their enemies." This disproves your assertion that black men never cared for liberty. The son of this general, Alexandre Dumas pere was one of France's greatest writers and a great advocate for liberty also.

>>10018608
>Greeks
>Romans
>White
i want northamerica to be rangebanned

File: William_Hazlitt_self-portrait_(1802).jpg (380KB, 511x668px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 511x668px

>>10018593

Yes; Hazlitt was quite correct in his assessment of him:

"This man (Burke), who was a half poet and a half philosopher, has done more mischief than perhaps any other person in the world. His understanding was not competent to the discovery of any truth, but it was sufficient to palliate a falsehood; his reasons, of little weight in themselves, thrown into the scale of power, were dreadful. Without genius to adorn the beautiful, he had art to throw a dazzling veil over the deformed and disgusting; and to strew the flowers of imagination over the rotten carcass of corruption, not to prevent, but to communicate the infection. The genius of Rousseau had levelled the towers of the Bastile with dust; our zealous reformist, who would rather be doing mischief than nothing, tried, therefore, to patch them up again, by calling that loathsome dungeon the King's castle, and by fulsome adulation of the virtues of a Court strumpet."

>>10018655
>Roman and Greek civilization brought the peoples of Northern Europe out of abject barbarian

This is not true though. They were just decentralized and lived more quaintly. Tacitus' account itself shows how much of a misnomer "barbarian" was.

>>10018668
Was referring to the jewish ideology of Christianity.

>>10018725

And yet they were constantly making war on one another for the most foolish of reasons. You can find noble qualities in them, but I could show you traveller's accounts who discovered very noble qualities in some sub-saharan African peoples also. What one cannot maintain is that their civilizations were even comparable to those of Greece and Rome and Egypt and India.

>>10018688
I don't give a fuck about your outlier examples, which in this case continues to prove my point since Dumas was probably genetically no more than a quarter black and was going the extra mile to fit in. But if you're going to present outliers and pretend those prove anything, there probably isn't much point in continuing the discussion here.

>>10018132
Blighted by recent rape scandals

>>10018709
They were though. No question about it.

>>10018728

So what are you contending; that the Old Testament is not Jewish but Christianity is?

Had the Athenians learned well the lessons of the Old Testament perhaps they would not have put Socrates, one of their own prophets to death.

>>10018741

Again this silly nonsense about "outliers" that reduces the mind to biology and genetics. At least have out with it man and admit that Naziism is a godless and materialistic ideology that denies the soul and freedom of will. If you believe in the soul then you cannot deny that we all make our own destiny. Epigenetics and neuroplasticity show that hereditary is far more complicated than was previously thought.

There was a time when an Athenian in the time of Solon might have looked at the Scythian philosopher Anacharsis and said, Ancient Athenian in the time of Solon: "That Scythian philosopher Anacharsis with all his inventions and wisdom--just a statistical outlier! He doesn't prove that those fair-haired, white-skinned barbarians can ever be capable of civilization!" How will you account for the fact that civilizations are so constantly rising and falling in history on the materialistic genetic hypothesis of intelligence? That ancient Greece produced an astonishing number of geniuses in comparison with the size of its population, unparalleled in the history of humankind, and yet degenerated into a mere subject people under the Ottoman heel? The answer is that they degenerated just like every other civilization by their moral vices and tore themselves apart as I have shown here. >>10018522 Not a single Jew involved in the process.

>>10018737
We don't truly know how they lived and why they did what they did since their culture was mostly abolished at the sword of the jewish ideology in question. Maybe the Germanic tribes held freedom of speech within their communities very highly as a cultural value.

As far as the other stuff, ok, I get it, you're only interested in talking out of your ass. These people aren't very different now than they ever were. No one could go into inner Africa until Speke in the mid-late 19th century. And you still can't now. And Egypt and India were also originally white civilizations. All the mummies they test are R1b and Indians still speak an Indo-European language. But I digress, fixing the many holes in your lack of knowledge isn't worth my time.

>>10018767

>Ancient Athenian in the time of Solon:

(P. S. Ignore this.)

>>10018752
They're both jewish, but more importantly non-European, obviously.

>>10018768

>No one could go into inner Africa until Speke in the mid-late 19th century

What exactly is your point here? That only strengthens my argument. I told you that many of the peoples in sub-Saharan African were reported to have had many noble qualities, you say they were had been untouched by outsiders when those qualities were discovered. Your talking about the race of the ancient Egyptians is also completely irrelevant.

this guy look like yid lol

>>10018785

And what is your point? You said Jewishness was about censoring free speech; I have shown you that there is nothing innately friendly to free speech in white people as such, that even among the Greeks and Romans tyranny had to be constantly fought against and that upon the whole the Old Testament is favourable to free speech, because it shows again and again prophets who speak the truth being condemned by society and put to death.

>>10018767
If you have still yet to learn that calling people "notsees" amid discussion makes you look like an utter fool trying to hide weak ass argumentation, I can only come to the conclusion that you're just a stupid person whose wall-of-text posts are not worth reading. Behave like an adult if you want to be taken seriously.

>>10018793
They were considered violent and backwards, as they are today. That's how blacks are and have always been. Not sure "noble" is the right word here.

>>10018718
Excellent. Good to see another admirer of Hazlitt.

>>10018802
You most definitely have not shown that. Freedom of speech is a value that has only ever existed in white societies. It is a fundamentally European concept, and as Europeans have lost power to jews that value has been eroded because jews are semites who do not care about free speech as an abstract concept.

>>10018808

Hold on. So are you going to disavow Naziism then? Was Hitler wrong in what he said? What exactly distinguishes your point of view from that of Hitler as far as the essence of our discussion goes? He chalked everything up to race just as you do, he blamed Jews for all the world's ills; the only differences are merely superficial ones.

>>10018849

I pointed out here that the Athenians put Socrates to death, >>10018752 I pointed out here the tyranny of men like Caligula and Nero and Draco and Phalaris in antiquity (and might have produced a hundred more) >>10018668, I pointed out here that Europe languished under above 1,000 years of darkness until it was pulled out of it by the efforts of only a few great men >>10018547, I pointed out here the despotism of absolute monarchy in France >>10018582, here that of the Index Librorum Prohibitorum and the Inquisition >>10018547, I pointed out here >>10018668 here >>10018752 and here >>10018802 that the Old Testament is generally speaking favourable to freedom of speech, I pointed out here that a fervent early advocate for free speech, Spinoza, was a Jew >>10018585, I pointed out that black men fought under Napoleon for free speech against white men >>10018688; how can you possibly continue to claim this?

>>10018852
I wouldn't disavow my neighbor's cat for an idiot like you. Jews have been a problem everywhere they've gone for millennia and have been kicked out of around 300 polities. And the desire to maintain racial integrity is biologically wired into us. That you automatically equate such things with a central European regime that lasted 12 years only makes you look like an ignoramus with regard to not only history, but reality itself.

>>10018176
Can you post a version of this that is for people and not ants?

>>10018875
Good for you, but none of those things do anything to prove that freedom of speech is not a European value. It has only existed in European nations because Europeans are more independent and individualistic than other groups and therefore value such a thing more than other groups. That's the root of it, being a people who cherish liberty. To say that virtue has been suppressed or challenged or even abolished over the course of many centuries is not proof otherwise; and the fact that it exists in western nations today and continues to be cherished and considered sacred by predominantly white men is what shows that it is a value unique to us.

File: mosleyantisemite.jpg (82KB, 500x712px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 500x712px

>>10018880

The "Jewish conspiracy to destroy the white race" business is a very modern phenomenon---you won't find a word about it until Houston Stewart Chamberlain's book of 1899 (which was Hitler's Bible). You don't even really hear about world-wide Jewish conspiracies altogether until the mid-19th century. Are you aware for example that the notion that Lord Rothschild "bought England after Waterloo" is a forgery invented for a political pamphlet first written in 1847? It is called the "Rothschild Libel."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-rothschild-libel-why-has-it-taken-200-years-for-an-anti-semitic-slur-that-emerged-from-the-10216101.html

The objections people raised to Jews in the past were chiefly on religious grounds. Why was William Prynne against the readmission of the Jews into Britain, for example? Not because he feared some sort of conspiracy or plot to impose degeneracy and financial servitude on the people but because "it was a very ill time to bring in the Jews, when the people were so dangerously and generally bent to apostasy, and all sorts of novelties and errors in religion."

The Hitler regime was the only one in history that blamed Jews for all the world's woes. None of even the other Fascist leaders did. Mosley did not and Mussolini only persecuted Jews under pressure from Hitler. So when you blame Jews for everything going wrong in the world where am I to suppose that you got it from? If you do think that Jews are responsible for everything bad in the world then why should you not sympathize with Hitler? You at least have to admit that he and the Nazi Regime are your clearest intellectual predecessors.

>>10018922
Are you jewish? If not, this must be your first day on 4chan if you feel this comfortable regurgitating jewish propaganda like that on here.

>>10018912

It is a value which has been held by certain European peoples at certain times, sometimes by only an extreme minority of thinkers. The peoples of the continent have never cherished freedom of speech like the people of Britain, hence why for example they have Holocaust Denial laws. And yet Britain with all its history of cherishing free speech is now throwing it away with this hate-speech nonsense. So there is nothing innately in the white man that predisposes him to free speech. Conversely I could show you hundreds of coloured and Jewish intellectuals who advocated for free speech. All this runs clean contrary to the genetic hypothesis of mind which supposes that people and races simply "are" what they are. No; they choose to be what they will be.

>>10018945

I have been on 4chan since 2007, /pol/ since the beginning, browsed Stormfront when I was 12 years old. I know every single point of view you hold like the back of my hand. Arguments and facts which I have collected by my own reading and which represent my simple point of view are not "propaganda." On the other hand I have not observed a single original thought to come from you so far. Who is the propagandized one? Can you refute a single fact which I just presented to you?

>>10018949
Who do you think has been behind the push for holocaust denial and hate speech laws in England and France and elsewhere? This gets back to one of my initial points about how jewish interests do not care about such things and are as a result the main people trying to abolish or skirt free speech principles in our societies. We're talking about an abstract concept here, too. Keep that in mind--non-European people's feelings on it are not always based in principle, but self-interest. Jews were some of the main people promoting the expansion of free speech and breaking down anti-pornography laws in the US in the 60s but were doing so as a means to obtain power and attack the wasp elite. And the wasp elite caved because they were more rooted in principle than self-interest. Now that jews have power they are the main people trying to suppress free speech or go around it using hate speech provisions. You have to look at how the group mean/average behaves and views such things, free speech or anything else; this is why you presenting outliers to me caused a mere shrug. It doesn't matter, and if you are using such examples to shape your basis of understanding you are missing the bigger picture.

>>10018967
You didn't answer my question.

Hey jew, if jews arent the problem then how come your kind promotes trannies on national geographic and open society policies, with a 90% voting rate for hillary clinton?

>>10018688
wow! BASED! LET THEM ALL REPRODUCE LIKE WILD AND LET'S KEEP SPENDING MONEY ON THEM!! 6 million dumases in the waiting!

>>10019024

I am a pure-blooded Englishman. But I have known many upstanding Jewish and coloured people who are indistinguishable from any other English person, conversely I know many English people who are utter moral degenerates who would open the borders of this country and bring it to ruin. I know from my own reading of history that racial absolutism is a modern phenomenon (in the 18th century to take merely one example, Dr Samuel Johnson, one of the greatest figures in our history, gave a substantial sum of money in his will to his black servant, Francis Barber, who had married a white woman in his life-time, so that he evidently saw nothing wrong in this), and that the Jewish conspiracy is a 20th century phenomenon. I reject the hereditary theory of intelligence as being discordant both with the lessons of history and with my philosophical position of dualism, and I know from the precedent of Enoch Powell that you do not have to be either a racialist or a racial absolutist to oppose mass immigration and wish to preserve the ethnic majority in your country, as people like this would wish you to believe >>10019046.

File: 1455047924673.jpg (228KB, 1280x959px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 1280x959px

>>10018655

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Unaipon

>Unaipon spent five years trying to create a perpetual motion machine. In the course of his work he developed a number of devices.[7] He was still attempting to design such a device in his seventy-ninth year.[8]

I'm not a racist but this article is not helping your point.

File: 1342072553051.jpg (47KB, 418x556px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 418x556px

>>10018688

>Napoleon's army, which was fighting (upon the whole) for liberty and freedom of speech as opposed to despotism and arbitrary power.

Did you miss the part where Napoleon occupied neighboring countries, deposed their rulers, and then put his relatives on the throne in their place?

You know the Germans called their wars against Napoleon "The Wars of Liberation" right?

Ever heard of the Peninsular War? Huh? Huh?

>>10019024

>Who do you think has been behind the push for holocaust denial and hate speech laws in England and France and elsewhere

You will find that it is both Jews and gentiles. I challenge you to show anything to the contrary. Censorship certainly was not invented by Jews. It was all gentiles censoring us in the time of the Inquisition and the Index Librorum Prohibitorum and it was not Jews who burned William Tyndale to death. As I have said it is not as if white people have some innate attraction to freedom of speech.

> the main people trying to abolish or skirt free speech principles in our societies

Again this is owing both to Jews and to gentiles. At most you will be able to show that Jews are overrepresented in subversive movements; they cannot be said to bear the chief burden of responsibility by any means. I go to one of the best universities in this country. Most of the people around me are fanatic leftists and most of them are also white people. No Jew can make you do anything against your will. If a people give up a belief in free speech that is because of their own weak-mindedness and servility and viciousness. Britain is declining because the people of Britain have lost their way, just as the ancient Greeks did. Ultimately Jews are nothing really to the purpose.

Are you aware of the utterly disgusting degeneracy that went on in ancient Greece and Rome, particularly in their declining stages? Jews had absolutely nothing to do with that; that was simply owing to a decline in their moral virtue. And yet in this case you are insisting that we have to posit the existence of a Jewish conspiracy in order to explain our fall.

>>10019094

Look at the case of the great French scientist Palissy. He struggled obsessively for 16 years before he was able to imitate Chinese Porcelain and came to such a pitch of poverty in the process that he had burn his own furniture for heat. Had he been born an Aboriginal and died before he completed his task somebody like you would have pointed your finger at him and laughed and said, "Ha ha, stupid Aboriginal!".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Palissy

>>10019106

Whatever your own opinion of what Napoleon actually was as a man, the people who fought for him were generally doing it on the basis of fighting for the liberty. That was why men like William Hazlitt supported him.

>>10019109

>it is not as if white people have some innate attraction to freedom of speech.

We literally invented it. Lots of brown countries still enforce blasphemy laws.

>>10019136

>fighting for the liberty

read: fighting for liberty

File: 1467164683004.jpg (150KB, 1357x946px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1357x946px

>>10019082
Would you let your white daughter marry a black man?

Would you be happy if all of your children married black people/muslim people, and all of your grandchildren were black / islamic?

>>10019082
>I have known many upstanding Jewish and coloured people

What you have to learn to grasp if you want to obtain a better understanding of how the world works, is that your personal experiences are absolutely meaningless and individuals don't matter. You think these are all individuals acting individually like you, but your own sense of individuality is clouding you from the reality that that's not actually true. A group like jews are tribal, they think in terms of what's good for their group, not their individual self-interest. You give me names like Powell and I can see you are getting there but are still unable to surpass some of the European traits that have been wired into you or shaped by your culture, hundreds of years of Christianity included. You meet an African who seems alright and so you automatically use that in your interpretation of the whole; but the only thing that matters is group averages, and regardless of whatever outliers you run into the mean African is going to be much more prone to violence and other socially destructive behavior ... that's what matters, how the mean behaves statistically. Jews are not like you either. They are tribal and your individualist way of thinking is losing against their tribal strategy, which is having a much more negative effect on your society than the mere erosion of free speech.

>>10019136

It's not my "opinion" though, Napoleon literally was a dictator, this is a historical fact. His soldiers were mostly fighting for their own self aggrandizement.

No offense, but are you mentally ill?

>>10018444
>The point is that insofar people have an opinion of Jews, insofar as their mind categorizes Jews separately, they have that opinion.
Honestly? This is true to an extent. I live near a jewish neighborhood in my city and I've heard casual antisemitism from people coming from all walks of life. Only the liberal suburbanite demographic seems to have neutered that impulse almost completely

>>10017502
Honestly if you read closely to what he's saying, he's not entirely wrong and I'm jewish.

I work at a call center and sometimes I'll say stuff to people over the phone that I know will send them flying into a rage but won't get me in trouble in any way (like being polite but giving slight indications that I'm only there to waste their time, using circular logic ) I have a natural knack for getting under peoples skin and I don't even know I'm doing it.

I'd bet a lot of chan culture (the Ben Garrison meme I know for a fact) was created by stealth kikearoos. I'm pretty sure trolling is in my blood.

I've also noticed that a lot of jews are giant attention whores who have an obsession with controlling their image. It's not all or even most, but it's definitely an over representation.

>>10019109
This is a jewish system. The American media attacks senators for not clapping enough for Bibi and every related policy they advance is in jewish interests. Yes, our traitors are a problem but the jew is the source of that problem.

>>10019176
This is true for pretty much everyone though. You'll find racism toward every group of people, from every group of people. Some more than others but it's pretty universal. I personally hate Chinks (and by that I mean FOBs), but I don't really share the same animosity toward any other race. I just find them fucking annoying and every time I'm forced to deal with one I know that the interaction will be unpleasant and a comprete waste of my time

File: 7f0bdea597eb7317fd22237efefaa61ea5cd5dfd.jpg (352KB, 650x897px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 650x897px

>>10019176
Notice how those liberal suburbanite/urbanites are also neutered themselves, sexually. They have no masculinity left.

>>10018444

>The world is becoming a very hostile place for Jews again. Like, very very hostile.

Oh it's annada shoah! why do they hate us so muuuuch?

*floods country with blacks*
*promotes degeneracy in the media*
*allow themselves to have an ethnostate by taking over the most powerful country in the world to defend and fund them whilst denying all white countries to be ethnically homogeneous*

Must be because we're so much betta!

>>10018582
>And yet amusingly I have seen Neo-Nazis call the French Revolution, which overthrew the horrors of censorship, suppression of free speech, lettres de cachet, the Edict of Fontainebleau etc. etc. "Jewish" (without a scrap of evidence, of course
This is not a nazi conspiracy theory at all. even Nietzsche goes over this in Beyond Good and Evil and The Genealogy of Morals.

>>10019197

I want a fobby gf. Most of them are pretty annoying though, mainly because they outdo themselves in living up to the "Asians can't drive" stereotype.

>>10019166

Again I utterly reject this notion of averages in the sense of "Que sera sera." Had you looked at the average Briton or German 2,000 years ago, as I have said, you would have seen a mere savage; a noble savage at best. The same is true of the Scythians. As I have pointed out here, >>10018767 there was a time when an Athenian might have called them innately inferior and the great philosopher Anacharsis a "mere outlier." But they would have been wrong. Roman civilization was necessary for Northern Europe to become civilized, and most of the coloured peoples of the earth were only brought into contact with civilization a few hundred years ago. Judgement on the matter is premature especially when thousands of black men have already proven themselves to be men of genius and worth already. As a dualist I contend that, what one man may do, any man may do.

Compare the average level of intellect at Athens in the age of Pericles, look at the astonishing number of men of genius that came from there during that time, and contrast it with the state of affairs only a couple hundred years later when the people are mere subjects under the Macedonian yoke. What happened? The genetic makeup of the people did not change; rather they declined in moral virtue.

Observe the difference between a man like James Ferguson, who began life as a simple shepherd living in the most humble of circumstances in the Scottish countryside, and self-educated himself into one of the most eminent scientists and men of letters in his day, and a man like Lord Byron's father, who squandered his entire fortune, was an abject drunk, womanizer, degenerate, and a murderer. Do you perceive what I am trying to say now when I speak of people's choices leading to their success? And so it is in the case of nations, which simply represent men in the mass. I accept that blacks have a lower average level of intelligence, a greater amount of crime in their communities, often accede to a low culture &c., I simply deny that this must be so. I say that they bring it on themselves by their own choices.

I accept that blame ought to be accorded to Jews where blame is due---that we ought to talk freely and openly about the Israeli lobby, the media, and such like things. I merely deny that Jews are the chief architects of our decline, or that all Jews are innately and intransigently evil.

Like Powell I am "conscious of the difference between men and nations" and so I oppose mass immigration and multiculturalism, but I deny that "one race is inherently superior to another." I accept that blacks and whites are practically different in the aggregate, but I deny that this is necessarily so, and I also deny that individual blacks may not become British as also that assimilating the black population which is already present here would any way "taint" our national stock for the worse.

>>10019218

You are mistaken about this. Nietzsche was deeply opposed to antisemitism. He thought it foolish. He was one of the most pro-Jewish German writers of his time.

>>10019171

The point I am making to you is one of intention. A great man like William Hazlitt thought Napoleon a freedom-fighter and this was a common belief among both his men and liberals in Europe. Whatever Napoleon actually was as a man is irrelevant to the point at hand.

>>10019150

Depends entirely on the moral character and on the case in question. Would you rather your white daughter marry a filthy degenerate white man who committed adultery and sat about all day and took drugs and collected benefits from the state, or an upstanding man of colour like (say) Thomas Sowell?

>>10019185

What you should say is some Jews are responsible for some of our problems. But what men of your cast of mind contend is that the Jewish race is both responsible for all or almost all of our problems and that it is biologically designed to be that way, as if it could be nothing else, so that in a sense all Jews are responsible, and that is what I reject.

>>10018522
>nazism
>materialistic

hmm.
Research more.

>>10019247
He was not "pro-Jew." He had a healthy level of admiration of them. But the other anon is right, he sees at the heart of the French Revolution the herd or slave morality of Christianity, which is just the "bait" that ancient Israel used to subvert the world according to Genealogy.

You should check out this new book, "Nietzsche's Jewish Problem: Between Anti-Semitism and Anti-Judaism" by Robert Holub.

>As Robert Holub shows, a careful consideration of all the evidence from Nietzsche’s published and unpublished writings and letters reveals that he harbored anti-Jewish prejudices throughout his life.

>Nietzsche’s Jewish Problem demonstrates how this is so despite the apparent paradox of the philosopher’s well-documented opposition to the crude political anti-Semitism of the Germany of his day. As Holub explains, Nietzsche’s "anti-anti-Semitism" was motivated more by distaste for vulgar nationalism than by any objection to anti-Jewish prejudice.

>>10019267
The only reason Thomas Sowell is upstanding in your eyes is because he praises white civilization and gives you an excuse to hate gangster blacks without having the pangs of moral guilt. You are a coward and a fraud. I would rather my daughter marry a strong, intelligent, and healthy white man, neither an African nor a wuss Britcuck like yourself.

>>10019268

I am talking about this definition of the word materialism:

"The theory or belief that nothing exists except matter and its movements and modifications."

Not this one:

"A tendency to consider material possessions and physical comfort as more important than spiritual values."

Naziism says that your hereditary makes you what you are and that is that. You can only make a better people only by breeding one into existence via eugenics programs like the Lebensborn project and by excluding the influence of genetic aliens like the Jews. I hold that that is sheer materialism. I say that such a point of view is incompatible with a belief in the soul, and that both men and nations rise or fall by their virtue or their vice rather than their blood.

>>10018718
Burke predicted (and warned) the french insurrection would lead into revolutionary terror many years before it happened. So no, your flowery obtuse criticism means jackshit

>>10019294
The Nazis thought that blood contained spirit. See Alfred Rosenberg.

>>10019294

>You can only make a better people only by breeding one into existence via eugenics programs

take away one "only"

same here:

>>10019241

>thousands of black men have already proven themselves to be men of genius and worth already

take away one "already"

I apologize for the bad quality of these posts, have been writing them in haste and not re-reading them properly.

File: Yikes.gif (2MB, 298x301px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 298x301px

>>10019267
>unironically referring to blacks as "men of colour"

>>10019241
>you would have seen a mere savage

And I told you this was not true. Read Tacitus' Germania, they are presented as people who very much resemble the kind, family oriented people who inhabit Germany today.

>I merely deny that Jews are the chief architects of our decline

So once did everyone telling you about the jewish problem today. Your evolution is simply incomplete. It's not about what you want to believe, it's about what is objectively true. Read the Culture of Critique.

You will see your major capital become a caliphate in your lifetime, and you are ahead of most of your countrymen so I have no doubt that you will come full circle once you further your study of the jewish question. The people invading your country will continue to abolish free speech because they aren't you and do not share your principles, nor will they learn to.

>>10019150
Would you rather your daughter marry a black muslim man who is very kind, respectful, successful, friendly and good hearted, or a sociopathic white man with multiple convictions of assault and robbery, that beats her regularly?

>>10019307

That is completely out of keeping with the understanding of what a soul is in the European tradition going all the way back to the ancient Greeks. A soul in the genuine definition of the thing is the essence of the man himself which only uses the body as a vessel. Hence why Socrates describes us conversing and thinking and reasoning in the afterlife, when the soul detaches from the body:

"What would not a man give if he might converse with Orpheus and Musaeus and Hesiod and Homer? Nay, if this be true, let me die again and again. I myself, too, shall have a wonderful interest in there meeting and conversing with Palamedes, and Ajax the son of Telamon, and any other ancient hero who has suffered death through an unjust judgment; and there will be no small pleasure, as I think, in comparing my own sufferings with theirs. Above all, I shall then be able to continue my search into true and false knowledge; as in this world, so also in the next; and I shall find out who is wise, and who pretends to be wise, and is not."

Rosenberg said that Jews were fundamentally inclined to be Talmudic and evil. Nobody before the 20th century would ever have contended that. Adhering to materialism in practice and then shallowly putting some idea of spirit on top of it which amounts to the same thing in practice simply does not hold intellectual water. You are still denying freedom of will and making the mind proceed from the body rather than really be its own spiritual substance.

>>10019335

>Adhering to materialism in practice and then shallowly putting some idea of spirit on top of it which amounts to the same thing in practice simply does not hold intellectual water

remove one "in practice." That is the last time I ever post anything without double-checking it.

>>10019277

Criticism of Christianity does not amount to criticism of Jews as such. What I asked for was any sort of evidence of the Jewish conspiracy to destroy or enslave the white race and forcibly impose degeneracy on them and the like before Houston Stewart-Chamberlain's book of 1899. In other words making Jews themselves out to be the source of all or almost all evil. That is what I contend is a modern phenomenon.

>>10018643
>even jews themselves admit that the importance of the law and interpreting the written word in their religion has translated into success in the legal profession

Yet most modern Western law is based on successful Graeco-Roman systems that existed prior to Jews having influence.

Islam is a similar "written word is sacred, abhor images" religion that hasn't obtained such a degree of supposed dominance. This is also true of Christianity to a lesser degree. Judaism isn't special. Hatred for Jews was based on clearly retarded justifications in the Middle Ages and has simply transmuted into modern urban legends and conspiracy theories, more palatable to the current zeitgeist than medieval folklore and antisemitic canards about host desecration, blood libels, the black death and well poisonings.

The way that antisemites whine about jews is the same way that niggers whine about white people.

>>10019285

What is "white civilization"? The civilization we follow in its best respects is derived from the ancient Greeks. There was a time when cannibalism was part and parcel of certain parts of "white civilization."

You completed ignored what I said when I asked, would you rather your daughter marry an upstanding coloured man or a degenerate white man. You simply conjured up a false dichotomy and evaded the point.

If your wife or child suddenly turned black tomorrow would you disown them? Don't you see how utterly silly it is to judge people on the basis of their skull shape and colour rather than their mind? If a coloured man is upstanding in his character and English in spirit then why should I hate him? It is your materialistic philosophy that causes you to hate him, because to you there is a "black brain" that gives rise to some sort of exclusively "black mind," therefore all blacks in a sense are guilty for the crimes of some, all Jews in a sense are guilty for the crimes of some. This is exactly what I was talking about earlier.

>>10018650
>I'm not a Nazi even though I have the exact same beliefs as Nazis because durrrrr semantic wank about political parties

If it quacks like a duck, m8.

>>10019183
>As a black man I feel (insert white supremacist talking points)
>As a homosexual I feel (insert white supremacist talking points)
>As a Jew I feel (insert white supremacist talking points)

>>10019323

I have read it, and know exactly what he said, and concede that there were many noble aspects to the ancient Germans. But they cannot be called a civilized people. And as I have said I can show you many examples from travellers' accounts of noble qualities and upstanding virtues in sub-Saharan black peoples as well. The point is there was a time when both Britons (say) and blacks were uncivilized, and that the Britons only got out of it by means of the Romans. So it is unfair to point the finger at blacks, who were only exposed to civilization a few hundred years ago, and say "Look! They never accomplished anything, they are intransigently inferior."

>Read the Culture of Critique

I have. And David Duke and everything else. As I said to you before I know your arguments like the back of my hand. I accept that blame ought to be accorded where blame is due but I still contend that fundamentally white people are doing all this to themselves. It is inescapable that Rome, Greece, and all civilizations manifested exactly the same symptoms in their decline as we do, without a single Jew being involved. To blame Jews for everything is just as bad as to blame the economic system for everything as the socialists do. We need a moral and a spiritual revival in the West. I fully support deporting anybody who is a traitor to Britain or who fundamentally opposes our way of life; I wish to reverse the demographic trends as far as in me lies: all I say is that there are good coloured people living here now and that they ought to be treated as fellow citizens and not forcibly deported or persecuted on the basis of the folly of materialistic racial absolutism. I accept that 10 million blacks moving to Belgium would destroy Belgium, but what I deny is that a few ten thousands of blacks assimilating into Belgium would fundamentally "taint" or "weaken" the country.

>>10019267
>that is what I reject.

I know you reject it, and I know you reject it because you have an incomplete understanding of the jewish problem. Jews see whites as the other, and this defines who they are. It's how they've stayed together for millennia as a tribe of gypsies. And it is also the source of their hatred of you and whites as a whole. It's necessary for them to distinguish themselves and define themselves in opposition to your interests, which strengthens their group cohesion, and is the main reason why they promote the opposite of what's in your interests, and they are therefore very much to blame for western civilization's present decline. This is what they do and it's what they've always done. It's nothing new.

File: 000000000000145342.jpg (931KB, 1000x3000px) Image search: [Google]

931KB, 1000x3000px

>>10019324
Fuck your meaningless dichotomies; my question wasn't between this or that, it was, given our current society where we do not arrange marriages between our daughters and two male choices, would you be okay with your daughter bringing home a black man -- would you be fine with it, in your heart of hearts, to see an old black ram tupping your white ewe?

>>10019335
>>10019335
Plato thought, as demonstrated in the Republic and elsewhere, that a man's body was as important as his mind, that he should maintain his body and improve his body physically, to better grasp philosophy itself. He thought that the body's perfection *fed upwards to the mind's perfection,* and did not simply want fine bodies on account of an idea. He thought the body improved the mind. Plato's conception of Nous then is of course not entirely disentangled from the body and the improvement of the body; instead it is enhanced by it, even though he ranks it in importance higher than the body. Why, then, would Plato, given the information we have today about human biodiversity, want to run the risk of permanently damaging one's progeny by ruining the physicality of their bodies (intermixing with Asians or Jews, on average) or by ruining the capabilities of their intelligence (mixing with blacks, Hispanics or Arabs)? Sounds thoroughly un-Platonic, that is to say, imperfect to me.

>>10019347
Well, evil isn't the word, but here is a section from Genealogy:

>This Jesus of Nazareth, as the embodiment of the gospel of love, this ‘redeemer’ bringing salvation and victory to the poor, the sick, to sinners – was he not seduction in its most sinister and irresistible form, seduction and the circuitous route to just those very Jewish values and innovative ideals? Did Israel not reach the pinnacle of her sublime vengefulness via this very ‘redeemer’, this apparent opponent of and disperser of Israel? Is it not part of a secret black art of a truly grand politics of revenge, a far-sighted, subterranean revenge, slow to grip and calculating, that Israel had to denounce her actual instrument of revenge before all the world as a mortal enemy and nail him to the cross so that ‘all the world’, namely all Israel’s enemies, could safely nibble at this bait? And could anyone, on the other hand, using all the ingenuity of his intellect, think up a more dangerous bait? Something to equal the enticing, intoxicating, benumbing, corrupting power of that symbol of the ‘holy cross’, to equal that horrible paradox of a ‘God on the Cross’, to equal that mystery of an unthinkable final act of extreme cruelty and selfcrucifixion of God for the salvation of mankind? . . . At least it is certain that sub hoc signo22 Israel, with its revenge and revaluation of all former values, has triumphed repeatedly over all other ideals, all nobler ideals. – –

Also, the idea that anti-semitism is somehow new or modern is patently absurd. See pic.

>>10017502
Because he's a dumbass.

>>10019372
I hate blacks precisely because I have never met a single black who has had something interesting in their mind, more interesting than an average white person.

Also,

>If your wife or child suddenly turned black tomorrow

Are you retarded? What kind of question is that? I cannot debate you in fantasy land.

White civilization is a collection of different rules and countries created by whites. Also known as what brits assume is everybody's philosophy, that the entire world can be made "white" like us good brits if just given enough shekels and education! Tip Tip! Cheerio!

>>10019347
>Jewish conspiracy
People need to attack this dishonest framing. Nobody who talks about the jewish problem ever says anything about a "conspiracy" even though tribal people like jews do obviously conspire going by the actual definition of the term. They act in their own group self-interest and to extend the power of that group. And this behavior is an easily identifiable part of nature so it's not that difficult to understand if you can shed the modern programming.

>>10019405
>without a single Jew being involved.

There are so many holes in what you're saying that I have trouble believing you have read what you say you have. Christianity was the ideology that brought down the western imperium, so to say there were no jews involved is transparently not true.

>>10019409

The Talmud is full of a lot of really nasty stuff and that ought to be openly discussed. Jewish ethnocentrism ought to be openly discussed. All subjects ought to be open to free discussion without ostracizing people as is presently done. Blame always ought to be accorded where blame is due. All I am saying is that white people bear the overwhelming proportion, the lion's share of the blame for their own ills. It was not a Jew who invented socialism, it was people like Saint-Simon and Owen. It was not a Jew who invented feminism, it was people like Wollstonecraft and Bentham. Jews may be overrrepresented in subversive movements but they are not the be-all and end-all, and there are also many fine and upstanding Jews who have the best interests of the West at heart and only wish to assimilate. Even in the 17th century, as I have said, Spinoza was advocating for religious liberty and freedom of speech not oppression, and so Moses Mendelssohn in the 18th. All men whatever have an immortal and immaterial soul and are ultimately responsible for their own actions; they are not predetermined to be or to do anything.

>>10019429
How many black people have you met? How many before you made up your mind about them?

>>10017758
Pure internet gold:

>For example, when the mouse hero Feather Kindface and his friend Good Goodly infiltrate the lair of the weasels: we are certainly going to face challenges from librarians on this, and not just in the states. Very little do I question such large passages, but what - may I ask - is the point of two mice heroes systematically murdering thousands of innocent weasel babies with sharp rocks? Yes, the content does bother me, but what also bothers me is that this passage is 200 pages long!

>>10019412

It is amusing that you bring up Othello. Shakespeare in that play makes him out to be a great and noble man, fully worthy of the love of the lovely Desdemona, whereas he who opposes the marriage and exploits people's racial prejudices (Iago, though he fails in the end) is a consummate villain. I have always said that had Shakespeare written Othello in Nazi Germany he would have been put in a concentration camp. His contemporary Dr Thomas Fuller by the bye called the black man "the image of God, though cut in ebony."

>Plato thought, as demonstrated in the Republic and elsewhere, that a man's body was as important as his mind, that he should maintain his body and improve his body physically, to better grasp philosophy itself

Yes, and I fully agree with this nor did I deny it. Mens sana in corpore sano. The healthier our body, the more we (if I may be permitted to use the words of Sir Philip Sidney) "lead and draw ourselves to as high a perfection as our degenerate souls, made worse by their clay lodgings, can be capable of." But the fact that black men have proven themselves to be sheer copies of white men---that there have been black Englishmen who were English in everything but their mere colour---that there have been so many black men of worth and genius-----proves conclusively that the black body is not a hindrance to the soul indwelling there, and that the black man is not endowed with a fundamentally different one; a single black man of genius conclusively proves that any black man may be a genius. That is what I, as a dualist, find to be an inescapable conclusion.

Consider this. When the ancient Athenians offered citizenship to the Semite Phoenician philosopher Zeno, they did not have any thought of his "tainting" the national stock; they merely wanted to bring a great-souled man of consummate nobility and virtue into their fold.

>>10019461
tons, I have had long conversations with many at parties, I see them each and every day, and one of the best friends from my childhood was black. Not that anecdotal matters, a concept you can't seem to wrap your head around.

>>10019444

See what I said about the fall of Classical Greece.

>>10018522

"Classical Greece had a proto-world-war called the Peloponnesian war (431 - 404 B. C.) and brought itself to ruin both by its decadence and its internecine strife long before there was a single Jew in Europe (the first mention of them being there is in the 3rd century B. C.). Degeneracy of all kinds ran wild there; bloody and needless wars between the Greek states were constantly going on. It was conquered by Macedon, Rome, and at last the Ottomans: this was because it had torn itself to pieces and collapsed into a mere shadow of its former self. So, there is proof positive for you that Jews are not singly responsible for the decline and fall of white nations. One of the greatest white peoples in history destroyed themselves long before there was a single Jew to be seen."

>>10019456
>>10019267
>>10019185
Is "The Jew" a children's book author?

>>10019211
>storm cuck performance anxiety
Go fap to Dirlewagner.

>>10019412
>biodiversity
A weasel word for incest.

>Also, the idea that anti-semitism is somehow new or modern is patently absurd. See pic.
You fucking mole! There's a big difference between antijudaism and antisemitism.

>>10019456
I reiterate that your understanding of the problem is incomplete and thus is your analysis here. Jews are overwhelmingly to blame for things like communism, feminism, and the post 60s permanent cultural revolution ideology that is destroying the west. They own the media companies that set the tone and attack non-believers of liberal multiculturalism as heretics because it is a system they have installed to protect themselves: yet another universalist, utopian system like Christianity and communism that were also forced on non-jews by jews because these systems protect jews. They are at the head of institutions promoting censorship, they run the NGOs and non-profits promoting mass immigration into our countries, they are the ones predominantly paying and promoting only politicians who are pro-Israel and who will reinforce jewish interests, they are the ones feeding these anti-white messages into our culture and browbeating whites as evil amd immoral if we do not accept our own displacement. And the list goes on. Yes, they are the source of this problem. If you disagree that means you haven't looked into it enough.

>>10018586
>It doesn't exist and has never existed in non-white countries

It doesn't exist and has never existed in white countries as well. Freedom of speech has never existed anywhere.

>>10019483
Well now we have millions upon millions in our fold, and we simply we cease to exist as a people in a century if we do not do something about it, and change the way we act. Do you honestly think Shakespeare would be happy looking at the racial conditions of our day? Or the Athenians? Do you honestly think that Othello was without any racism, that it was in praise of moors, that he was committing an act of social justice against mean English racists (why would he need to do this in his time, in his London?) and not merely craft a psychological portrait using intense issues, though with a very poorly written character (Iago- possibly the worst character of Shakespeare's in terms of moral depth and realism)?

>>10019503
Go fap to Chuck Schumer

File: Phillis_Wheatley_frontispiece.jpg (397KB, 806x1024px) Image search: [Google]

397KB, 806x1024px

>>10019429

Personally I find most people to be fools whether black or white. Sir Terence Aubrey Murray said it best. "Mr Carlyle says her Majesty's subjects, who are spread all over the world, and include every race, "consist of so many millions, mostly fools." Mr Carlyle is a very profound thinker.""

Let me ask you then, do you find no enjoyment in the works of a great man like Dumas? You will say he was a quadroon. Well, what about the charming letters of Ignatius Sancho, who was a personal friend of luminaries like Garrick and Sterne? What have you to say when presented with the example of such a mind as that of Phyllis Wheatley?

"We will ask, if the WHOLE WORLD affords, in male or female, white, dusky, or black, an example of development of higher poetical genius at so early an age, and under circumstances no more favourable. We call upon any who doubt the intellectual equality of the African, to point to an individual, in any nation, in any period of the world, who, at so early an age, and under circumstances so unfavourable, has touched a harp of more harmonious and of nobler and more lofty sentiment, than that of Phillis Wheatley the negro girl."

>>10018586
So, when are you going to defend free speech by spreading CP?

>>10019519
Dumas is just adventure stories. Nothing spectacular.

Also, it is quite funny that all black authors, such as the sheboon you posted, are surrounded with quotes like the one you posted, just freaking out that a BLACK PERSON picked up a pen!!! Holy crap!! So talented!!!

It's insecurity, for one thing.

Show me a Dante of the black race. Go on.

>>10019502
There were jews in Greece, man. They have been a part of every European (or Indo-European) empire from Sumer to Egypt up to today. Jews were kicked out of Egypt for something called "normative inversion," meaning they imposed on the late Egyptians an ideological system that was an inversion of their own: the sacred became the unsacred, polytheism became monotheism, etc. And strictly enforced in the authoritarian manner we see among Christianity and communism and liberalism. These have the same features and reflect exactly what is happening now, i.e., the inversion of western norms, because it's what they do everywhere they go. It's what they've always done: attack from within using a group strategy while pretending to be their host.

>be famous
>die
>suddenly a bunch of acquantices come out of the woodwork to say malicious and outrageous shit about you

>>10019505

How will you account for the fact therefore that these movements like Universal Suffrage, Feminism, Socialism; that pornographic literature, defences of abominable practices like pederasty and the like; that censorship and tyranny and violation of the rights of the individual, all predate the 20th century? When do you say the Jews suddenly became primarily responsible for them? We had movements even during the English Civil War in the 17th century, when there was not a single Jew in the country, who wanted to institute Communism on the nation (see the Diggers etc.). When I look at a movement like Female Suffrage and Feminism (to take an example) all I see from the 17th century onward is a constant stream of gentile writers advocating the practice as it gains traction. I see Jews getting involved in an over-representative way in the very very late stages of the game----very late 19th century, early 20th century---but that is all. When I see that all these phenomena gained traction in the decline of other civilizations also the conclusion is inescapable that Jews cannot bear the chief blame for them. As I say, blame must only be given where blame is due.

You cannot blame Christianity for everything. Look at the rise and fall of ancient Greece before there were either Christians or Jews. >>10019502

Let me ask you this, simply this. The Labour party in this country is in favour of open borders, is in favour of mass immigration and totally ruining this country both by that means and by socialism. Their leader is a white man, Jeremy Corbyn, and most of their M. P.'s are white. So where do you contend the Jews come into the matter there? By what intellectual games can the blame be shifted off those white M. P.'s and the white voters who voted for them, and primarily onto the Jews?

>>10019532

There were no Jews in Greece before the 3rd century B. C., well after Greece was subjected to the Macedonian heel and fell away from its glory days owing to its self-destruction. I can promise you that. I invite you to go and find any information to the contrary.

>>10019532
By the way, since Nietzsche has been a part of this discussion, what I said in the above post about "normative inversion" being the reason for jewish expulsion from Egypt, is something Nietzsche diagnosed as well: what he called the "transvaluation of values." That's the jewish slave morality of Christianity he speaks of inverting the aristocratic values of European society. That is to say, and as I've been saying, none of this is new. The jewish problem and how it is reflected through jewish behavior is ancient. You can draw from Egypt, Greece, Rome, medieval times, Victorian England, or Nietzsche's time and find the same diagnoses of jewish behavior in the form of inverting the norms of their host society. And it is exactly what we see in our jewish-run culture today.

>>10019491
>implying I'm the other poster
>not giving an actual number
anon, you're a bitch

>>10019531

It is accepted in the literary tradition, and was accepted in his very times that Dumas is one of the greatest writers in world-history. That is simply a fact. It had nothing to do with his colour. No skin off my nose if you lack the taste to appreciate his works.

I pointed out here >>10018655 that Britain was conquered by the Romans in 43 A. D. Now who is the first man of genius, whether in art or science, whom you can show me as coming from Britain? You will have to wait 300 or 400 years before you find such a man. Africa was only properly colonized in the 19th century and yet the black race has already produced thousands of men of worth.

File: brain armchair.png (208KB, 807x935px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 807x935px

>>10018522
Naziism, racialism, and dualism are such tedious philosophies. You are exactly as bad as the Communists in your own way. All of you are near-sighted, localistic philosophies which reduce all the phenomena on Earth to base causality. Permit me to illustrate.

Nazi or racialist localist: "Nothing can help the black man. He is innately inferior."

Communist or socialist localist: "The black man can only be helped by changing his environment for the better. Therefore we need to implement socialist programs to "make" him better.

Dualist localist: "Neither genetics nor environment "makes" us who we are, because all men have an immaterial and immortal soul. Genetics versus environment is a false dichotomy produced by a godless age. The black man will improve when he chooses to improve himself. Men and nations rise or fall by their virtue or their vice."

Freethinking astrologer: "Nothing about "us" decides our fates. They are determined by the positions of the stars. Genetics versus environment versus free will is a false trichotomy produced by a constellationless age. The black man will improve when and if the heavens foretell it."

>>10019586
I don't count the innumerable nogs I've met, you freak.

>>10019599
Holy shit, what is that fucking logic? England was given like 3 fucking fort-cities and some new metallurgy, and became the greatest empire in the world after some time since that is slow start, especially due to population numbers. Africa has been given billions and billions and billions in aid, has been given the cream of the crop technology, the fruit of the western world, to start with, and they have produced what? What significant, actually significant (i.e. significant that if a white man did it, it would be substantially significant and not just slightly above the ordinary) things have they produced? I saw a video of an African using to planks and some shitty wheels on Aljazera plus, intended to showcase his ingenuity. You people are a part of a delusional cult where you delude yourselves into thinking this barbarous race of infant minds has accomplished anything by poorly imitating whites. Mental Gymnastics the post.

>>10019608
damn that's big brained

>>10019513

Of course not, but that is exactly what I said myself. I am a Powellite. "It is simply about the numbers." I oppose mass immigration and multiculturalism utterly but I also reject racialism. What separates me, or Shakespeare, or the Athenians from the modern racialist or Neo-Nazi is that the former were willing to make an exception, that the former fundamentally understood man in terms of Spirit and not in a materialistic sense, whereas the racialist understands men only in terms of categories and collectives, says that he Must be what he will be, says that mind fundamentally derives from body and so that mixed-marriages are innately wrong and that the national stock of a country will be "tainted" if every last coloured person is not deported and that no coloured person can ever really be trusted or can ever really assimilate etc.; that the coloured man is innately, permanently, perennially, and perpetually inferior.

Look at the comments section in this article from the Daily Mail today about Serena Williams' mixed-race child. The top comment for example says:

"Sweet baby, and the name is actually quite beautiful as well."

With 2300 upvotes and only 80 downvotes.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4880394/Serena-Williams-shares-photos-baby-girl-Alexis.html

Does this sort of thing not demonstrate that the British public will ever accept racial absolutism. Well-nigh every person in Britain has a coloured friend or acquaintance at this point. They will support a movement that seeks to oppose mass immigration and reverse the demographic trends, but they will never support racialism. All that racial absolutists and Neo-Nazis do is scare them off and make them think that the only alternative is the mass immigration lunacy we have right now. Racialism and racial absolutism defeat their own object. If the B. N. P. had dropped their silly rules about having to be white to be a member, I am sure their support would have been ten times greater than it was.

>>10019625

>Does this sort of thing not demonstrate that the British public will ever accept racial absolutism.

read: Does not this sort of thing demonstrate that the British public will never accept racial absolutism.

>>10019575
I'm not saying jews invented feminism or anything at all; in fact I would say the opposite since jews are uncreative people who rarely come up with any ideas of their own. What they do is take ideas that they know are harmful and merely extrapolate them and push them to the far degrees. Feminism is an example of this, but so is postmodernism in relation to German philosophers like Nietzsche: the nihilism and other features are seized upon by jews in power and promoted to the extremes. Hell, our present liberal state is an extension of the ideals of equality and such taken to their extreme. But it comes back to their self-interest.

Jews have an extensive history with the labor party but I'm not sure what you're asking. Jews aren't retarded in their own right though. The labor party with the new influx of Muslims is backfiring on jews wrt Israel. But jews are still heavily involved and vet all of these politicians, or attack them if they don't toe the line, and jews historically get along fine together. Remember that jews were responsible for letting Arabs into Spain before too. They are cousins.

>>10019583
I don't think this can be definitively stated since so much from that period has been lost, but that's not something I feel like getting into now.

>>10019625
They will support such racial policies when the time comes to support them, when they have become minorities in their own country, and when the world has reached a tipping point where all races are radicalized, due to shortage of food, declining oil economy, and climatological distastes, coupled with the failure of Western countries to remain democratic (having racial blocs all equal in size is not a democracy, that is a civil war waiting to happen. See the Balkans). Everybody, even a big brain cosmopolitan centrist like yourself, will see to this position one day, or you and your countrymen will die. Simple as that.

>>10019642
climatological disasters*

>>10019623

Some people would say that foreign aid has been in many respects harmful to Africa. The welfare state certainly has been harmful to Africans in America.

Britain "became the greatest Empire in the world" about 1700 years after the Romans conquered it. We only began properly to colonize sub-Saharan Africa about 150 years ago, as I said.

>>10019639

I am almost certain that you will not be able to find a single reference to a Jew before let us say the 4th century B. C. Not in the works of Homer, Hesiod, Thucydides, Plato, Demosthenes----not anywhere. We know that the manuscripts of the classics have not been doctored because we find that (apart from trivial differences for the most part) the different copies basically coincide with one another, and we know that most of the really great authors have survived also. If the Jews had any part to play in classical Greece we should have heard about it from Thucydides, Demosthenes, Herodotus, Plato---anybody---or somebody later would make reference to their role in it---nobody does---not Plutarch, not Dio Cassius-----absolutely nobody. They come into play long after the liberty of Greece had been extinguished.

File: un_population_projections_steve_sailer_2.png (87KB, 1234x852px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1234x852px

>>10019658
>Some people would say that foreign aid has been in many respects harmful to Africa.

There's no question about it. They can't take care of themselves and western aid has allowed the population of Africa to skyrocket to the point where at the end of this century one in four individuals on the planet is projected to be African. That is going to lead to disaster. Think of that, one in four people on this earth being a 70 IQ average African.

>>10019658
You said you are a Powellite. I recommend you try listening to Jonathan Bowden. You might change your mind.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aR4MvD9IEAE

>>10019675
You are 100% right that you will find no reference to jews because they they didn't call themselves jews and the word "jew" didn't even exist then. Do you know what they called themselves?

File: african explosion.webm (1MB, 1000x471px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1000x471px

>>10019686
To elaborate upon this nibba's point, see attached.

File: assemblywomen.jpg (373KB, 1774x2048px) Image search: [Google]

373KB, 1774x2048px

>>10019633

Aristophanes in ancient Greece and many thinkers since have posited that the mere existence of Woman Suffrage alone would lead to most of our troubles---the breakdown of the family, sexual immorality, socialism and the like. Trace the history of Woman Suffrage and you will find scarce a Jew to be found in all its really import evolutions, from the 17th century to the Representation of the People Act 1918. Besides the chief trouble which is our decline of moral character I find Universal Suffrage to be a far more likely explanation for what is going on than Jews. Thomas Carlyle vehemently predicted that the collapse of our society would result from it. Many men did.

"Not as opponent, but as advocate of women's real rights, I oppose the important and disastrous change in the law, contemplated by Woman Suffrage. I anticipate the social revolution, disruption of domestic ties, desecration of marriage, destruction of the household gods, dissolution of the family, which would result from the political enfranchisement of married women."

James McGrigor Allan (1827 - after 1890), British anthropologist and writer.

>>10019687

I have listened to him before, and I like a lot of what he has to say, but I disagree with him in the same respects as I should disagree with you.

>>10019686

Overpopulation in Africa is a real concern, and I have already conceded that 10 million Africans moving into Belgium would destroy Belgium. But racialism and racial absolutism do not flow as a consequence of holding those positions. The proliferation of the barbarian Germanic tribes and their constantly pouring over the border until they overswept the Empire was a concern for the Romans also, but that the Germans were not innately inferior I am sure you will concede.

>>10019726
Germans actually are inferior to meds lel

>>10019704
>Trace the history of Woman Suffrage and you will find scarce a Jew to be found

Did you even read what I said? I doubt the above is true to the extent you think it is, but again, that's not my argument here, and no one is saying that jews invented women's suffrage, but that they pushed it and were heavily involved in the promotion of feminism precisely because they know women are easier to control, especially in a democracy. Early feminists were predominantly jewish and feminism is something that would be easy to reign in without a jewish problem. Women will follow the main authority figure, and that figure is no longer their own men, but the culture that shapes women's beliefs and is pushed on them by jews. Again, that's the source.

>>10019726
The Germans were if anything superior, as they continue to be now. Northern Italy remains populated by German peoples and they are far more successful than their southern counterparts. But there is most definitely absolutism here. Africans are not Germans and are not even remotely as capable as Germans, nor will they ever be. These are two groups that evolved over thousands of years in vastly different environments and moving even a small population of Africans to Germany will not raise even a fraction of them up to German levels of achievement. And it's in no way beneficial to Germans anyway so it should not be done at all, and all of these groups that have been relocated to the west need to be returned. There is no benefit to us having these people in our nations.

>>10019760
It benefits car sales and mobile phone sales and therefore more Africans will be imported. think about it: each African is another sold car and mobile phone. There is NO way they will allow to reverse the flood.

It's over.

>>10019732

Pray show me where the heavy Jewish involvement in Woman Suffrage was from Marie de Gournay and Mary Astell in the 17th century to Mary Wollstonecraft and Jeremy Bentham in the 18th to J. S. Mill in the 19th to the passing of the Representation of the People Act 1918. You will find hundreds and hundreds of names involved during those centuries and well-nigh none of them will be Jewish. Carlyle, one of the finest minds in literature, was an ardent opponent of Universal Suffrage and if Jews were really behind the push for it he must really have been an incorrigible dunce not to have noticed their involvement in it (if there was such involvement) a single time all his life-long in any of the many dozens of volumes of his works.

File: close.jpg (16KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 480x360px

>>10019786
unless capitalism dies and with it the racial unconsciousness of the lest 150 years

>>10019786
It's definitely not over as it's only just begun, but this is why the jewish problem must be dealt with first. European nations borrow money from jewish banks to give to the invader population to buy these things. It's a big scam, with the jew at the center, but it's far from over. These people are extremely dysfunctional and have no chance of competing or actually taking over anything but major European capitals they will simply destroy.

>>10019841
>Capitalism's inherent tendency to incentivize profit at the expense of literally everything else is the reason for mass-migration
>If we kill all the Jews this won't be a problem
Are you retarded?
Do you seriously think gentiles wouldn't just take their place in the economic hierarchy and continue to do the exact same things because they have the same profit motive?

>>10019788
You said there were some jews involved, didn't you? This doesn't have anything to do with my points itt, though, because I never said jews were the sole force behind women's suffrage.

>>10019856
I get really tired of having this conversation on here, but I will rifle through the main points for your benefit. Capitalism is not the problem, jews are the problem. Capitalism is not a machine that operates on its own terms, it is a human system reliant on human inputs. It relies on incentives and presently those incentives are working in the interest of jewish globalism, but those incentives can be changed to work in favor of national interests and those of the people of a particular nation or region. Institutions and systems are reflections of the people in charge, and the reason why you think capitalism is evil is because jews are mostly in charge of determining how the capital system functions, and jews hate white people, therefore capitalism works against white people, while the less capable white people, assumedly like yourself, mistakenly blame the system instead of the people determining its incentives, inputs, and as a result its outputs.

>>10019859

Personally, I can't think of a single one. I am sure there must have been some simply on the basis of statistical averages, but I imagine it to according to something like a 100:1 ratio. I can't think of anybody who was really important as well as Jewish.

>>10019900

Cicero must have been Jewish then, because he declared that property was a fundamental basis of civilization.

File: winonaryder.gif (2MB, 540x259px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 540x259px

>>10019900
>Capitalism that doesn't chiefly incentivize profit is possible
>People are not inherently greedy
>If we kill all the Jews it will be happily ever after. The system is perfect. Jews are the problem.

It makes me laugh when /pol/ think they're not brainlets.

>>10019910
Well, I don't care much about the topic but a quick seems to turn up plenty of information to dig into if you really want to find out.

http://www.bing.com/search?q=jews%20and%20women's%20suffrage%20history&qs=n&form=QBRE&sp=-1&pq=jews%20and%20women's%20suffrage&sc=0-25&sk=&cvid=EBE16D29A4F04CA1B9FB2A55313341CE&ajf=60

>>10019916
>>10019918
I'm happy to debate the finer points, fellas, but you're going to have to supply real arguments.

>>10019931

All that comes up there is a "Jewish League for Woman Suffrage" which was founded as late as 3 November 1912. No great historical figures or anything like that.

>>10019939
The real argument is that you have yet to demonstrate that a capitalist system without Jews would not be incentivized by profit.

Indeed, this very idea can be conclusively discarded on the basis there are economies in the world that are chiefly gentile-run and they still depend on profit and indefinite growth. Japan for instance.

>>10019955
And why is that? Because that is how the global capital system in the post-WWII era has been set up. It's foolish to think this is the only possible outcome or that different leaders working in the interest of whites would produce the same result, because it obviously wouldn't. This is a human system that can work however we want it to work. The problem is that the policies and incentives that determine the results work in jewish interests and against those of whites. Capitalism is the wrong boogeyman here. It's not the problem.

>>10019983
>Capitalism is the wrong boogeyman here
>the wrong boogeyman
>boogeyman

>>10020006
Fair enough. The problem is jews, not capitalism. Capitalism is an easy, abstract target for stupid people who don't yet understand the jewish problem.

>>10019983
But you've totally dodged the point, and failed to demonstrate a non-profit motivated form of capitalism is possible. Clearly we can see in non-Jewish run capitalist economies they're still fundamentally driven by profit, as any capitalist must maintain their business through competition on the market. This naturally entails expanding their capital and over time this will lead to wealth being concentrated among the few that are most successful at this - Jewish or gentile it does not matter. Capitalists as a class are locked into an arms race of economic-growth by virtue of the most basic way the market works. It is inevitable from this there will be an economic elite vastly more powerful and more wealthy than the rest, yet despite their immense riches they will not be free from this as their profits must continue to grow in order to protect their industry from each other and from potential newcomers. Exacerbated even more by the fact that new technologies are constantly emerging, giving a new source of new competition that may reshuffle the economic hierarchy - as we have seen in the past 20 years or so.

You've also revealed a new hole in your logic, the implication that prior to WW2 was not profit incentivized and as such did not experience a capitalism-induced degeneration of culture. It absolutely did. Even before WW2 culture was becoming more professionalized, more sensual. While traditional values were getting all the more trampled upon in the pursuit of profit. Prior to WW2 global capital still needed to constantly expand and grow, in fact if it didn't there would not have been a WW2 at all.

So I invite you again to actually make a real argument and demonstrate your points.

File: laughing slavs.jpg (31KB, 324x196px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 324x196px

>>10020023
>Capitalism is an easy, abstract target for stupid people who don't yet understand the jewish problem
>Capitalism is an easy scapegoat
>The real problem is that Jews are out to get us because they don't like us.

>>10019983
most retarded thing i've ever read

>>10020032
>Jewish or gentile it does not matter

It absolutely does matter though, and there was a stark difference under capitalism pre and post jewish takeover. Profit can still be made while industry leaders maintain a sense of noblesse oblige toward those below them, as with a Henry Ford model, because they view them as their own people. That was how it used to work but there were still a lot of kinks being worked out so it wasn't perfect. It's been in the postwar era where jews have created different incentives that reward those who disregard any in-group loyalty and focus purely on constant growth at the expense of the people. You are saying that is the only possible outcome when it's clearly not. Capitalism does not automatically go to war with its own citizens and attempt to replace them with cheaper workers, and Japan is a good example of that. Leaders in Japan haven't allowed that to happen because they are looking out for their own people's interests instead of relying on constant short term growth, so nothing is predetermined here. The Japanese have said no to the scam western leaders have bought fully into: jewish banks loan government money, government gets into debt, jews say government must import new workers to pay down debt and keep money machine flowing. Japan said no to this and they'll be better off for it in the long run. They retract, so what? Ultimately they chose this outcome, which makes what you're saying false.

You are right that this need for constant growth is at the root of the current problem, but you don't understand that it's just a ponzi scheme being orchestrated by jewish financial interests. Yes, they need to create constant growth in order to keep their project from imploding, so they issue more debt, bring in more dysfunctional people, expand welfare state so they'll will keep buying shit and keep the money flow going, keep privatizing shit, make it easier for capital to move internationally, keep turning whites into serfs ... but this is not "capitalism" anyway, it's an irresponsible and out of control global ethnic financial scam. Manipulation through and through. The policies of capitalism are set at the International level through institutions like the World Bank, IMF, EUCB, BIS, etc., as well as private investment banks. That is the problem, that's who calls the shots and makes policy. But if you get rid of those entities and the jews running them out of our nations and put power back in the hands of white men with a sense of stewardship then you would create a much more harmonious system that looks out for the people, institutes policies that don't allow debt to get out of control, and relies on responsible growth. Capitalism is not one thing; it is ours to shape and control.

>>10020038
>>10020057
Not seeing the arguments, boys, only your fear of making them.

You haven't addressed the point of capital accumulation. This is the economic reality that completely undermines your idea that capitalism can be tamed. As the only master capitalism knows is whoever controls the capital, of course many people control capital, we call them capitalists. But the "masters" of the system so to speak are those under whom capital is most densely concentrated. - the Mark Zuckerbergs and Warren Buffets of the world. Capital is a concrete thing that in our system is controlled as property, it is possible to control more or less of it than someone else and because of the principle of capital accumulation it will inevitably concentrate into just a few hands.

As you're keen to point out those hands are disproportionately Jewish, but the interesting thing about capital is that it does not discriminate. It can just as equally be concentrated in the hands of a gentile as it can a Jew. And if we were to get rid of the Jews all-together and reshuffle all of their wealth it is an inevitably that this wealth will re-concentrate in the hands of someone else. Thus is the folly of saying capitalism is "ours to control", capitalism is nothing more than the capital that flows through it. And that capital will only ever be the domain of its proprietor, it is only theirs to control. It makes no difference if they're a gentile, my being a fellow gentile does not give me any more say in what Elon Musk for instance does with his capital. His capital is not mine to control at any point, only his.

And the great thing about capital is that is that what direction it will take can more or less be predicted. Not flawlessly as humans are not fully rational agents with access to all information. But you can draw up approximate economic observations. And as I pointed out earlier there's a big one based on the following. That the market necessitates competition, capitalists have the obvious incentive to compete with one and other not just to expand the wealth they have but to maintain it - to ensure that no other capitalist gets big enough to usurp their market. This is just as true for Henry Ford as it is for Larry Ellison, they must compete, their capital must continue to grow. Capitalism in any form must strive for indefinite growth, as it necessitates indefinite competition.

And that is precisely why under any form of capitalism it is an inevitability that capitalists will want to expand their potential markets as far as possible. This is why capitalism will always grow to a point where immigrants, for the most influential class, become a desirable economic asset. With immigrants there comes more customers, more commodities to be sold and more money to be made. To use anons earlier example of a used car salesman every new African in Europe is a new customer. For the multibillionaire every job sent overseas is money saved.

And that is why the future does not have room for both Europe and for capitalism.

File: NAZBOL anime girl.jpg (102KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 1024x1024px

>>10020241
Meant for
>>10020132

>>10017793
shitted.com

>>10018087
Mm-hmm. I had a feeling about that post -- artful damage control. Rather in the genre of the New Yorker's review of Crews's new book on Freud.

>>10020241
Whites would be much more likely to philanthropically throw into the commons and not be evil hoarders of wealth stereotypes in a system where they receive status for moral behavior that encourages using their money to better their society. That was more or less how it was for the first couple hundred years, and for longer under kin aristocracy instead of an alien elite. Jews as that alien elite have no such connection and therefore wealth being increasingly in their hands has led to an increasing divide in wealth distribution. What a surprise.

>It can just as equally be concentrated in the hands of a gentile as it can a Jew.

No. Jewish control over capital has made capital a nepotistic weapon. And when ethnic outsider oligarchs are in control of such things, it's also no surprise that whites increasingly become worse off while the white people with money are puppets like Buffet and gub-subsidy hound Musk, or jewish media whipping boys like the Koch brothers, etc.

The central issue is an ethnic issue and I am assuming you are jewish by your use of "gentile," and due to your continued assertion that there is no difference between how money functions and is distributed in the hands of jews and whites. I find this patently false and laughably so. Jews do not have any stewardship toward whites but whites in a white nation would, and in the past have almost always had, a connection with their kinsmen, and acted responsibly toward them.

That's the root of the problem: giving control of your money to an alien elite who think they have a right to rule over others. This is why the west has so many problems. Capitalism is not the problem, jews are the problem. But they've always been the problem because they don't understand that this attitude they have where everyone is their goyim slave and that they have a right to rule over others is why they continually find themselves unwelcome. Jews do not share a European sense of morality and are ruthless and terrible semites; therefore, capitalism in their hands is ruthless and terrible; but capitalism would not be nearly as ruthless or terrible in the hands of good people, and especially the actual producers of capital, who want what's best for their people.

>>10017758
>Ordinarily I replace those terms with the correct ones after they have served their purpose in exciting the necessary passion needed to describe their malevolence
Fantastic.

>>10020357
>but capitalism would not be nearly as ruthless or terrible in the hands of good people, and especially the actual producers of capital, who want what's best for their people.

Lol this is ridiculous.

bamp

>>10019697
Africa...easy on the carrots.

>>10021339
Only worthwhile post in this entire mess.

>>10017502
they do lack generosity towards non-Jews.

but as faults go, one could do worse.

>>10017502
https://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/6ztxmn/the_timeless_wisdom_of_roald_dahl/

>>10018292
You're completely right, but you're going to get nothing but pushback from these weak idiots. Jews don't work. They sell their tools and immediately begin deceiving non-jews because their convenient rule book allows it.

These people are trained to react to any idea that people (especially nonwhites, but if those are unavailable then at least non-christians) would never collectively do anything like this.

They're either stupid or scared.

>>10019686
>>10019697

We're gonna need a bigger wall.

File: nordicucks.jpg (175KB, 938x844px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 938x844px

>>10019760

>>10017735
>enjoyed marginalizing
Why do people talk like this? Those groups are already marginal. They need soil in their mouths.

>>10017763
>Even from his earliest days, he was a hateful little fuck.

Nobody who talks like this is going to be taken seriously.

>>10017793
Do these people not know that writers like Dahl write for money, not acclaim? Dahl wouldn't have given a shit about the Booker Prize - as Anthony Burgess once said "ten thousand pounds, to a millionaire, is not very much".