Antilife
We have previously referred to the "spirituality" of the worldview of Bangism (the post-Jesus version of matter-rejection a.k.a. Savior-ity/Christianity) as being denied, forgotten, and/or overlooked. It is incredibly stupid to say you believe an omnipotent, invisible, first-century rabbi created the world, and Jesusian Christianity did do over a millennia of horrible things to Europe and Europeoids. However, Bangist Christianity is worse. It is more dangerous by far. Jesusianism was the first few spots of the leak upstairs that should've clued you in, and it is very stupid to say that the rabbi from the Middle East is good for Europeoid genetic coding, but the full-on flood is definitely worse. (If you're not sure about that, turn the bathwater on, get a little of that bathwater on your hands, and sprinkle a few drops of water on your feet. After that, turn that bathtub water back on, fill the tub as high it can go, then get in that bath, aim face-first, and go all the way to the bottom, not coming up. Take a bath that way for a few hours, and then you will agree with us. Traditional Christianity was those first few drops: just a few newcomers entering Europe. It is unquestionably much better than what we see now, but it was a horrible initial stage, and believing that those times were good is incredibly stupid. The good times were before that, when cultural expectations about who could come into Europe were that zero people not from there could come in. Happily saying "Christ is King!" is a celebration of the beginning of a terrible flood just because you weren't drowning when the flood started.)
Wherefrom comes that healthy sense of wrongness when males presenting as females (costuming, affectation, decorating, inflecting, careful shaving, etc.) is a bad thing? It is much like the feeling of wrongness felt by some guy in 1850s London when he realizes the unusually forward woman to whom he thought he was talking was really a man--an invert costumed as a female. Besides that, it is the same sort of feeling felt by some guy in 1050 Manchuria when he realizes the unusually forward woman to whom he thought he was talking was really a man in that version of female-costume. And so on. Men who desire friction from other men (hoe moe seckshuals) have been around for a very long time, and it is stupid narcissistic ignorance when people who like that think they are now doing something novel when they behave that way. They are not; there have been inverts doing female things for thousands of years, and modern tee people are that same thing.
Think of the word for what you are doing now: living. Next, think of the way you spell live backwards: evil. One of the things that Bangist Christianity has done effectively is elevate evil. In the same way that a flood in the basement can actually drown people, whereas a few wet drops on the top of the basement stairs are not doing that, the flood is the bad thing; the killing thing. Christianity is that thing--a philosophy of breaking Europe (Europeoids), and it is an error to say/think that the Jesus version of Christianity is good. It is deluded to say that just a few little drops of water was a good thing, because although that situation was better than drowning in the later flood, both situations are of course related. One led to the other. Stories about Jesus' universalism led to political correctness and affirmative action; stories about Jesus' love being better than real things led to communism (S.R. is a fictional character, and stories about how nice S.R. was are similar in that to stories about how work on collective farms beat the profit motive). All of those horrible things, including torturing/killing nuns/priests and destroying cathedrals, were just modern versions of the same torturing/killing Europeans who objected to the Christian takeover and destroying places. Those people/places were later called either different kinds of Christians and different kinds of churches or pagans and pagan shrines. If you can think of any really fake big things that happened, and how those really fake big things got called real history, you have seen the results of the Christian takeover. That initial takeover--christianization--was just an earlier form of the Middle East taking Europe. When White women scream and cry at the camera that it is so wrong to keep immigrants away from them, when European politicians try to bring still more immigrants into Europe, it is a modern expression of that same thing. Jesusians who advocate for Whites choosing to freely worship a rabbi are on the Middle Eastern side--trying to replace philosophy generated by Europeoid brains with philosophy generated by Middle Eastern brains. Like people drowning in a flood, though, things have gotten worse. Christianity--matter-rejection--is now worse. That is why Jesusians are often better--even though they're wrong, they are much more likely to be against Bangism than more modern matter-disavowers. Like the inception of communism, which communism (a type of matter-disavowal without Jesus) was worse than traditional Christianity, people who've been deceived by rabbi-worship are often much better than people who've been deceived by a more modern type of matter-disavowal.
Bangism, just like it cannot say why there should be morals, is unable to define evil. Jesusianism can do that. As previously discussed, saying that an action is against the will of S.R. is stupid, yes, but it is massively better than having no reason at all (which includes saying that some kind of generalized, ephemeral sense of goodness does the same thing, which is all that Bangism has). Jesusianism is very stupid, but it is quite rational when people turn to it because they are really rejecting the empty nothingness of modern mainstream society.
In the same way that the currently popular Bangist take on evolution neglects the way that components of that environment correspond to that environment, the guesswork and implication employed by Bangism for "bad things" is incomplete. Shoddy. Low quality. Like with the way Jesusianism just never really mentions whether Jahweh can make a rock so big He can't move it, Bangism has neglected how anything can possibly be bad.
A useful rubric to use is also one that most people instinctively understand. Bad things are against life. Good things are for life. That covers most/all of what Jesusians like about traditional Christianity, and it does it all with a full respect for Europeoid genes, without any need for make-believe stories about a rabbi from the Middle East who cares about those things therefore you should too.
There is a horrible vulnerability built into Europeoid genes, namely that empathy and forgiveness are good things. Those are nice things, but they leave people with those genes extremely vulnerable to invaders who do not have those genes (thus do not have those characteristics). That is why Jesusian Christianity was designed the way it was: the solo man focus and virgin woman appealed to the repressed male home-O-sekk-shoo-ulls who were so good at being inside the gates and unlocking them at the right times. Moreso, the ability of that fictional character to forgive anything--even the unforgivable, such as forcible unwanted physical contact of a certain kind employed on a minor--made him appeal to a minority of pervs and a majority of people with genes for empathy and forgiveness. The design of the savior-from-matter character--S.R.--was done that way to produce an effective weapon for use against Europeans. That weapon worked, getting the presented of a allowed immigrant into Europe to go from 0% to something a little bit higher, and then in the 21st century something a lot higher.
Many people with those same genes still have this feeling that S.R. is so good, which leaves them extremely vulnerable to ethnocentric invaders. Jesusianism was designed thus, and as we now sit in the 21st century, we see how the Middle Eastern philosophy of universalism could prove suicidal to Deep Europeans who still like it.
Tea Rights
Societies infected with Christianity--an antilife philosophy--embrace tea rights. To better understand this, ask yourself how many babies a man having frequent physical intercourse with a (tee) gurl produces from those couplings. As many as produced from the union(s in case they have more than one) of two lesbians who marry each other. What about how many babies produced by this complete slattern (gurl living the life in 'Frisco) who gives free BJs and rear-entry to every guy who comes by the old bridge at midnight on Fridays? How many times does she get pregnant?
The same number! That zero is important. It takes the strongest motivation to make new life--the orgasm--and grants it to imitative acts that do not produce new life. They don't just have a very low chance of producing new life: they have a 0% chance. If some druggie slut does a bunch of guys for hits, and if she almost always takes birth control when she remembers, there is still at least one pregnancy she's too afraid to abort, and then she likes the baby when it's born because of this feeling she has that it's kinda cool, and it all ends up producing life. Sure, it took a few years, the other two sluts who hung around her coterie don't get preggers like that, but after 50 years her grandkid has a bunch because she's always wanted to, and it's human history--a net gain for life.
That is why transcending the zero is so meaningful. When Christianity first took Europe, it took it a lot of years, but 2% allowable immigration grows. Doesn't seem like 2% is significant, but now Sweden has a lot of certain kinds of crime it didn't before, and population replacement is much higher than 2%. Thinking that Jesusianism was good because then was better than now is very stupid. Saying "Christ is King!" is saying you agree with Middle Eastern philosophy replacing European philosophy. Part of making up the crap about paganism--making it out like the conquered victims believed in invisible sky-things the way Christianity wanted you to believe--is this: a replacement of European philosophy with philosophy of the Middle East. Deep Europeans didn't actually believe in any of that crap, but once Middle Eastern philosophy crept into Europe, and from then on, it was said that they did.
Comments
Post a Comment