If you are not actively working to 'alter' the current U.S government in favour of installing a state that supports our ideology then start doing so. The nation's days are numbered and if the wrong group seizes influence then you will see further cuckery take place. This is prime time to be eliminating opposition. Do what must be done. HH

Trump's Phony "White Nationalist Terrorist" List >by Ahab on Apr 10, 2020 >On Monday, the Trump administration launched a major escalation of the war on white identity and civil liberties by declaring a so-called “white supremacist group” a terrorist organization for the first time in United States history. The “white supremacist group” in question is an obscure Moscow-based formation styled the Russian Imperial Movement (RIM). According to state officials, RIM guilty of providing “paramilitary-style training to neo-Nazis and white supremacists” and playing “a prominent role in trying to rally likeminded Europeans and Americans into a common front against their perceived enemies.” >The selection of an obscure Tsarist group, without name recognition even to most white nationalists, struck observers as an obvious ploy to set an easy precedent intended for use against other groups in the near future. Nathan Sales, counterterrorism coordinator to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, boasted openly about the new precedent being set: “These designations are unprecedented…. This is the first time the United States has ever designated white supremacists terrorists, illustrating how seriously this administration takes the threat. We are taking actions no previous administration has taken to counter this threat.” >Sales credited the move with an Executive Order signed by President Trump in September of last year, “the most significant expansion of federal terrorism sanctions authorities since the aftermath of 9/11,” which allows the State Department to “designate groups and individuals that participate in training to commit acts of terrorism,” as well as “designate the leaders of terrorist groups, without needing to show that they were involved in particular attacks.” In other words, the State Department now can label organizations and individuals as “terrorists” even if they have not been linked to an attack – and their primary target is white nationalist groups. >This move follows months of propaganda from Zionist media ginning up hysteria about the “white supremacist terrorist” threat, including staged hearings in Congress last fall reminiscent of Stalinist show trials. Initiated by Israeli-fifth columnist Max Rose and other enemies of white America, no actual representatives of white nationalist groups were heard. However, ample testimony was given by shadowy Jewish special interest groups such as the ADL. The timing of this designation, in the midst of a historic pandemic shutdown and on the cusp of a major economic downturn in the United States, indicates the Zionists have no intention of letting up on their relentless drive to outlaw free thought and peaceful opposition to their rule. It seems they are determined not to waste the opportunity presented by the COVID-19 public health crisis to implement their unpopular anti-white totalitarian agenda while public attention is distracted. >The fact that this action was carried out by the Trump administration virtually guarantees a softening of the backlash by those Trump voters still paying attention. Reaction of boomers and conservatives on Twitter was as expected: “Good… now do antifa.” “Antifa?” “Excellent… Now do Antifa.” “What about antifa?” “Label ANTIFA as terrorist organization.” This reaction shows the average Trump voter will not object to white Americans patriots being labeled terrorists by the government, so long as the government also labels a couple of token far left groups into the bargain. >This is yet more evidence Trump’s re-election would actually be worse for white nationalists in the United States than the election of Democrat Joe Biden. While Biden would undoubtedly appoint aggressively anti-white officials to his cabinet such as former Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe, and pursue a more openly anti-white agenda, the same measures coming from Biden would certainly provoke more outrage from mainstream right-wing media. Just as anti-war Democrats from the Bush years melted away during Obama’s wars and crimes against humanity, so has white popular discontent over immigration and other abuses softened into a passive complacency under Trump. Just as Nixon’s right-wing bona fides gave him the political capital to go to China where a more peacenik Democrat would have failed, Trump’s right-wing bona fides allow his administration to pursue a sinister totalitarian crackdown against pro-white dissident groups without raising the ire of conservative media. https://national-justice.com/current-events/trumps-phony-white-nationalist-terrorist-list http://archive.is/YDpAf

I was out at the park with wife , sister-in-law and brother-in-law as well as a cousin. We’re enjoying our picnic spending time with one another and suddenly , one of these women start spouting off about onlyfans.com. Seems fine, keep my mouth shut. Suddenly, all the women are talking about how nice it would be to do it, use it to make side cash >someone even got paid to send a picture of their leg and a razor blade >it’s not that baaaad I flip my top, yelling about how porn and onlyfans is a jewish contrivance to continually push degenerations >how on Earth are we supposed to show our little ones right from wrong, when their moms are posting on onlyfans >the double standard is laughable, you can onlyfans, I can’t watch porn So we move on >sad strange silence and we move on. Then on the drive home , my wife throws out this >”its the jews, huh? “ I explain I dont want to talk about it she presses and we rant to each other about this shit for an hour. Eventually find common ground and start to calm down. I explain my issue with all of this is that I use the word jew as a proxy for all the controlling masses that shove degeneracy and immorality down people’s throats until it seems “natural”. Not to mention all the shaming, and propaganda and sheer brainwashing they do to women. >need makeup to be beautiful >need empowerment but need a man >need a job but need to be a housewife literally bullshit conflicts for all women and I think that sucks

Why Corporations Support Black Lives Matter When They Didn’t Support Occupy Wall Street Western corporations are falling over themselves to show their support for Black Lives Matter. Professional sportsmen proudly display BLM logos on their shirts, television shows hold moments of silence for George Floyd, and the FaceBook and Twitter accounts of countless large entities have paid their respects. But no corporation did anything like this for Occupy Wall Street. This essay explains why. The Occupy Wall Street movement began in September 2011 with a campout protest at New York’s Zuccotti Park. The protest was sparked by rising inequality in America, something that had increased sharply after the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-08. Bank bailouts had ensured that the wealthy avoided any of the suffering from the crisis, and that the poor took the entire burden. OWS’s most famous chant was “We are the 99%”. This referred to OWS’s belief that the top 1% of Americans were hoarding a grossly disproportionate amount of resources and power. Their fundamental motivation was to express outrage at this state of affairs in the hope of forcing change to a more equitable system. They made demands such as getting corporations and corporate lobbyists out of politics, granting the working class a greater share of production and reforming the banking system to restrict speculation. The movement appealed to an entire generation of young people, who were just then beginning to understand that they were going to have a lower standard of living than their parents did. These young people saw in OWS the potential to arrest the relentless decline of their living standards by enabling them to come together to assert their collective interests. This terrified the American Establishment. If there’s any one single thing that the Establishment fears, it’s poor people coming together on the basis of class. Class solidarity is the only way that the people can form a broad enough front to work against inequality without being divided and conquered into impotence. The formation and expression of class solidarity, then, is a direct threat to the interests of the ruling class. In the wake of Occupy Wall Street, the 1% came together and decided upon a strategy to prevent this from happening again. They realised that they had to pre-emptively divide and conquer the people because, left to their own devices, the people would inevitably organise and demand their right to an equitable share of production. The greatest fear of the Establishment was the coalescence of the 99% under one banner. Having previously observed the degree of animosity that existed on account of racial tension, a plan became apparent: to divide the 99% up along racial lines. This was primarily to be achieved by pushing a racial oppression narrative that claimed that white people owed blacks reparations for past injustices.

Why is it that *every* fucking anthropology video I find about race says that race is a social construct. What the fuck. Literal biological anthropologists say that race is a social construct. I torrented an anthro course and this is the girl's arguments: Race: Most biological anthropologists today reject the idea that the concept of human race has any biological validity. Arguments: 1. There's no agreement at all as to how many races we should be identifying in the world. This does not mean race does not exist. This is like saying color does not exist because no one can decide how many colors we should be identifying in the world. Also, race is pretty easy to classify. People seem to operate on the idea that race is just skin color. But at the core, it's about geography. If a person evolved in x area over thousands of years, they are of race x. Just because a computer scientist will tell you the three main colors are red, blue, and green, while an artist will tell you the main colors are red, yellow, and blue, does not mean that colors don't exist. 2. We know to a certainty that there's no such thing as a pure human race in the world today. While this may be the case, it still does not mean race does not exist. You can still be 90% race a, or 90% race b and you would be considered to be part of that race. Using the color analogy again; just because no pure red, pure green, or pure blue does not exist (let's just pretend it does not exist naturally), this does not mean red, green, and blue do not exist. These colors still exist, they just make up the other colors. 3. There has been no known entity as a pure human race any time in human prehistory. See above. Let us pretend pure RGB does not exist, but colors do exist. I can still place an RGB color code on all the colors that exist and call the ones that are majority red ""red"". 4. Only about 15% of human genetic variation occurs between races. 85% of such genetic variation occurs within a race. That is still 15% of variation, which is significant. And this fucking question implies race is biological?!Also, this woman claims that 2 people will be placed in the same race just because of skin color. SO this argument goes out the fucking window if you're putting sub-saharan Africans, Aboriginal Australians, and Southern Indians together in the same race when you do your study.

The pics are from an IG account (@antidote503) of a guy that seems to have been flying or being flown to every riot around the country and is now a "Fire Fighter." (((They))) denounced antifags as arsonists so fast it must hold water, or gasoline. Here is a list of arsons committed in the Pacific NW region. Criteria for inclusion was grassfire/wildfire. Urban fires were excluded except for the clothes trailer one. The goal is to match up any of these names with pantifa. July 29, 2020 Glide, OR Jedidiah Fulton accused of starting wildfires https://www.kezi.com/content/news/Man-armed-with-machete-accused-of-setting-six-wildfires-571947561.html August 8, 2020 Placer City, CA Kevin Carle arrested for starting brush fire https://www.abc10.com/article/news/crime/man-accused-of-intentionally-starting-fire-in-woods-near-tahoe-city/103-83bdfe8b-d3ce-4558-b222-66591640d7eb August 12, 2020 Ukiah CA (HWY 101) Alberto Vincent Acosta accused of setting 6 brush fires https://kymkemp.com/2020/08/13/man-accused-of-lighting-six-fires-in-and-around-ukiah-yesterday-arrested-this-morning/ August 19, 2020 Big Sur, CA Ivan Geronimo Gomez arrested for 2000 acre wildfire https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/article245089880.html August 20, 2020 Santa Paula, CA Guadalupe Molina-Pacheco arrested for starting wildfire

I'm in the last chapters of Revolt Against the Modern World and I struggle to understand many of the ideas he seems to define only vaguely. Currently the most important one, because of my interest in the miracle that was the Roman Empire, is the following excerpt: And so it happened that Christian egalitarianism, based on the principles of brotherhood, love, and community, became the mystical and religious foundation of a social ideal radically opposed to the pure Roman idea. Instead of universality, which is authentic only in its function as a hierarchical peak that does not abolish but presupposes and sanctions the differences among human beings, what arose was the ideal of collectivity reaffirmed in the symbol of the mystical body of Christ. Can someone please elaborate what this universality is? >inb4 you killed a thread for this. I would like this to become the documentation for all things evola. I've searched the archives, nothing similar exists.

Recent studies have shown that the frequency of race-baiting content in the mainstream media has increased sharply over the past decade. Terms such as “structural racism” and “racial inequality” have spiked in use. The lazy reason we’re all given is that this is a sign racial issues are finally being treated with due seriousness. The truth is much more sinister. Many people have noticed that the mainstream media now pushes race issues at every opportunity. The major news shows now feature racial issues in almost every broadcast. Often, innocuous issues are spun to make it seem that black or brown people are being oppressed in situations when they really aren’t. Spokespeople for racial collectives are featured prominently. The mainstream media has made it seem as if racial injustice is the single most pressing issue in all of society. With the hysteria around the George Floyd killing, it reached a truly religious fervour. This extreme attention paid to race issues, at the expense of class issues, is part of a deliberate divide-and-conquer strategy. The simple story is that the mainstream media is owned by international banking and finance interests, and these interests control the loyalties of the ruling class of every Western nation. The last thing those interests want is for the lower classes to unify, because if the lower classes did unify it would be against the international banking and finance interests and their lackeys. So those interests direct their employees in the mainstream media to promote racial narratives intended to set those lower classes against each other. They know that a large proportion of the working class is non-white. By lifting that part up, and by pushing the white part down, they guarantee tension and conflict. Pushing racial consciousness ensures that the non-white working class takes an antagonistic attitudes towards white people, and consequently get rejected by the white working class. As this column has previously pointed out, the corporate world has thrown itself in behind Black Lives Matter when they did the exact opposite for Occupy Wall Street. This is also deliberate. Although corporations act as if their support for Black Lives Matter is for purely altruistic reasons, the true reason for their support is that promoting racial narratives at the expense of class narratives serves their interests. Simply put, race divides us more effectively than class does. Although the white working class has no voice in today’s political scene, they are still some 35% of the population of the West. This means that the majority of poor people in every Western country are white. For these people, being told that they are privileged because of their skin colour – when still poor – is an outrage. But this idea is pushed because, not despite, that it is outrageous.

How many of these fuckers actually believe they're anti-fascist? The more I take a look at communists,marxist leftists and the BLM cess pool, it's easier to see these people are the real fascists. Some how they have achieved in manipulating the social structure and fooling it into thinking the average conservative family are nazis. This is the sort of stuff that makes me believe the devil is real.

Racism can mean one of two thing: enacting, supporting, or tolerating laws or policies which discriminate on the basis of race / enacting, supporting, or tolerating (state or individual -level) acts of aggression towards individuals (and their property) on the basis of their race. This is a bailey version of racism because it is easier to attack as being unreasonable, and the primary tactic of attacking the other motte form of racism is by associating it with this form of racism as a way to kill all possible considerations that may be given to it's claims. It can also can merely refer to belief that one or more racial populations have positive or negative qualities that significantly differentiate them from other races, that different races possess antagonistic relationships to each other (particularly non-whites towards whites, most especially Jews and blacks), or beliefs that challenge that commonly-accepted race-related narratives (present and/or historical), such as considering them to be false, incomplete, or deceptive/misleading. We need to change the narrative by separating these two terms as cleanly as possible. we need to make it so that racism may only refer to the above, and not to the below, in order to make people feel safer in talking about racial differences. It's a small but very important step in taking back a place in this discussion, whether or not you belong to both groups or just one of the two. for example, you can be realistic about racial differences and still believe that any type of aggression by the state or by other people towards it's members (or their property) - including any state which passes/upholds any policies/laws which discriminate based on race - is morally unjustified. you can still believe in statistics, and maybe make initial assumptions about an individual based on their race, but be open to making your judgments of that individual ultimately determine your first-hand experiences with them. you could be like that, people exist who are like that in their factual and political beliefs, and we need to highlight these people with their own word.