Post AsAC7LkInPZa22iJ72 by SockPuppet@lab.nyanide.com
(DIR) More posts by SockPuppet@lab.nyanide.com
(DIR) Post #As9bwmiQaOX68rV3Eu by SuperSnekFriend@poa.st
2025-03-17T18:33:50.649908Z
1 likes, 3 repeats
The way you attack this is not by answering the thought-terminating cliche straight like the two responders did. You play with it. Don't answer the fool according to his follow, lest you become like him. Answer the fool according to his folly lest he becomes wise in his own eyes. What you want do is make prove the absurdity of his definition as well as make him betray his false and hidden assumptions, including presumably the belief of the "evils" of White nationalistic countries and movements like the Confederacy and Third Reich, functional Christian individualism, and God's lack of concern for the well-being of any nation's particular identity and eternal existence.Ask Stepthen if he is alright with a nation becoming White-only or the sort from a mere policy change. After all, a nation is a mere arbitrary collection of people under the same government. If the government changes and wishes for that collection to be particular, what's that to him? If he complains that is not loving to certain races and ethnicities or is against the Bible, then you can attack him two ways: 1. You can ask why he is concerned suddenly with the well being of groups that are, to him, defined more or less as arbitrarily as "nation" and are supposedly malleable. 2. You can ask what doctrine or moral law he is trying to impose to stop such a hypothetical policy change, exposing his real belief systemAnd of course, you also pull the Jew and Israel card and ask him if he is alright with Israel forcing the its own nation being a particular composition against his definition or if it's alright for other governments to force Israel to empower Palestinians in the Knesset. If he refuses to answer or answers in the negative, proudly proclaim to the world what a hypocrite he is and force him to dance around until he leaves and/or blocks you, as you have already won, or admits that the definitions are arbitrarily defined and applied against Whites and nationalism, but excludes others non-White races especially the Jews. If he affirms positively, then ask why he is not supporting anti-Zionism in America, Europe, and Israel so his presumed morality is being pushed on an active nationalist group that is in power, rather than being on those that are not in power (WN's).These people are hypocrites. You don't have to accept their foundations anymore. You do not have to accept they are speak and act in good faith for the love of God and neighbor.
(DIR) Post #As9cKVjhMoakQmPKwi by SuperSnekFriend@poa.st
2025-03-17T18:38:07.964317Z
3 likes, 2 repeats
>What if he refuses to bite with the initial questions?Then demand from him why we on the dissident and far right should ever listen to another word he says and ask why we should ever accept his definitions of "nation" and the like as both historically and politically descriptive and morally proscriptive. He's not God. You don't have to act like he is a chief arbiter of these terms in front of others. Don't fight for every thought-terminating inch with him. Make HIM fight for every inch.
(DIR) Post #As9cmufgFgjVsH4Ufg by SuperSnekFriend@poa.st
2025-03-17T18:43:15.778443Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
Notice by saying in that smart ass comment, "American changed [the definition] *faggot face*" that he understands his definition is not the historic norm. He is not stupid. He is a wolf in sheep's clothing.
(DIR) Post #As9ctzKFLVQyKvQ4i8 by reallyangry@poa.st
2025-03-17T18:44:30.945050Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@SuperSnekFriend he's a bitch in bitches clothing the bitch, see this is why i think violence is good, he needs some done against him.
(DIR) Post #As9tFfcMtj6yqrFyRk by Charles_in_Charge@poa.st
2025-03-17T21:47:44.709826Z
2 likes, 3 repeats
@SuperSnekFriend We refer to the Navajo and Cherokee as nations, despite the fact that they don't have government's or territory independent of the US. In calling them (and them calling themselves) nations, we explicitly recognize that "nation" is a group of people sharing a common history, language, culture, spiritual background, and by necessity, blood. Different people by definition can not share a common backgroundsA nation-state is a government that rules over a territory comprised mostly of a single people, which is to say nation, and that government is usually also mostly comprised of people from that same group. To my mind an empire is a government that rules over more than one group of people, or multiple nations. This historically has meant one nation-state going out and militarily conquering other nation-states, then making those conquered territories and people vassals. Nation-states tend to be relatively stable things, absent natural disasters or invasion, as their cultural cohesion tends to have less internal strife. Empires on the other hand are unstable things, since they are unnatural and only come about through force and imposition. They last only so long as the government has the means and will to impose its rule. The moment it ceases to have the means or will, the various nations will begin vying with the central government and each other for wealth, power, territory, and prestige. Thus the empire crumbles and flies apart. The US is an empire, although not in the usual historical sense. It has lost the will to impose its rule on the various peoples within its domain. This happened because so many different nations have been brought into its borders and so many cultures/ideas/philosophies have been allowed to take root that the core culture is no longer sure of itself. Doubt and confusion leads to weakness. A uncertain and confused government can't rule a nation-state, let alone an empire.Heterogeneous empire always give way to one or more homogeneous nations. This is how it has always been, and how it will always be. At some point the US as it was known will go the way of all things, and one or more homogeneous nation-states will almost certainly rise to occupy most or all of the land it now possesses. This process can not be wished away with liberal platitudes. Liberalism is dead, the Enlightenment is dead, even if the people people who champion them don't yet realize it. We're just watching the body bleed out and twitch.
(DIR) Post #As9tf9dOQyjvBZt6P2 by SuperSnekFriend@poa.st
2025-03-17T21:52:20.939299Z
0 likes, 2 repeats
@Charles_in_Charge You are preaching to the choir here. Subversive guys like Stephen and senile Boomer cuckservatives like White know this is how the far right defines larger people groups and wants others to define those group, just like it had been throughout the pre-20th century history and lexiconPeople like Stephen don't care and want to push the nation envelope away from genetic lineage. They are not looking for a rational argument, like you just posted.
(DIR) Post #As9u8ActpCHMf0Ubtg by Charles_in_Charge@poa.st
2025-03-17T21:57:35.725324Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@SuperSnekFriend This echoes some of my thoughts.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQfNRC_OWYA
(DIR) Post #As9ulstLBKJ9Ex7VKq by jeffcliff@shitposter.world
2025-03-17T22:04:45.629650Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@Charles_in_Charge @SuperSnekFriend > Different people by definition can not share a common backgroundsmore 'by definition' bullshit use of definitions and just goes downhill from there https://www.lesswrong.com/w/arguing-by-definition
(DIR) Post #As9v20XcVZ7FbAeHJY by SuperSnekFriend@poa.st
2025-03-17T22:07:41.048412Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@jeffcliff @Charles_in_Charge Actually, what Charles was quoting was the law of non-contradiction. You cannot say "[x] people group is not-[x] people group" because you cannot say that "P equals not-P" in logic.
(DIR) Post #As9vA8fACCcN6W3Q2q by jeffcliff@shitposter.world
2025-03-17T22:09:08.111100Z
2 likes, 1 repeats
@SuperSnekFriend @Charles_in_Charge sure but you *can* say that members of a group can differ based on properties other than blood
(DIR) Post #As9vfDWcAVllA1sIkq by SuperSnekFriend@poa.st
2025-03-17T22:14:46.223500Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@jeffcliff @Charles_in_Charge Fair, but liberals and cuckservatives are trying to force discrete and distinct, and sometime incompatible, people groups together based on non-relevant properties and characteristics, like merely being a member of the homo sapiens species. We're interested in what differentiates various races, nations, ethnicities, and family groupings and how those differences should work morally and politically. The other side either doesn't care or only cares in calling such as evil and about breaking down every little distinction that is hard-coded in a group's genome.
(DIR) Post #As9vy6NYxfJgV3e6im by jeffcliff@shitposter.world
2025-03-17T22:18:10.544212Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@SuperSnekFriend @Charles_in_Charge Being a member of homo sapiens sapiens is relevant.It's common ground that can be built upon
(DIR) Post #As9wn2zLKLxukjbs36 by SuperSnekFriend@poa.st
2025-03-17T22:27:23.467628Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@jeffcliff @Charles_in_Charge Only if we are discussing what is common for all men. We're talking about hard distinctions among people and how we are to treat those distinctions in politics and ethics. Referring to words and concepts of commonality lick "homo sapiens", "mankind", or "image bearers of God" are red herrings, because going back to what is common is not dealing with the questions of distinctions at all. The only people who would fight you over definitions of both commonalities and distinctions are usually those who see any non-White and non-Far East Asian person as not human. Those people are, thankfully, few between, even in the dissident right and among nationalist circles.
(DIR) Post #As9xB7USF1N7fHdmgS by Charles_in_Charge@poa.st
2025-03-17T22:31:44.613504Z
1 likes, 2 repeats
@jeffcliff @SuperSnekFriend My brother and I are different people. We have different tastes, different views, etc. But we are still family, still share the same mother and father, the same history. I had a good friend; a older Vietnamese guy, came over with the first wave of boat people. We had a lot in common in terms of politics, humor, etc. Despite that we were different people, different history, vastly different upbringings, etc. He is of a different nation, and always will be. He has lived in the US since he was a teen, but whenever we talked about Vietnam he referred to it as "my country." And that's Vietnam is and was; it's his country. Not the US, despite how long he had lived here, despite him being a citizen, despite how much he says he loves the US. Despite all that, Vietnam is and will always remain "his country." Vietnam is where his heart is, where his people are, where his culture is, where his language is spoken. If the communist government in Vietnam were to vanish tonight, he would almost certainly be on the next plane home tomorrow. My friend is different than me, despite all we have in common, because we are from different nations. My brother is and always will be family, despite all our differences, because we are of the same family, the same nation. There are usually variations within groups, but those variations do not invalidate group distinctions.Without the natural bonds afforded people by that common language, history, culture, spiritual background, and yes even blood, a nation-state becomes nothing more than a soulless economic zone, populated by interchangeable consumer/production units, the only reason to cooperate is to make money and because they will be sent to prison otherwise. It's an ugly social construct, the cultural equivalent of brutalist architecture. Only white leftists are foolish enough to entertain the idea. Literally no other demographic believes in the proposition nation.
(DIR) Post #As9xmpYBODYL1tMm5g by Charles_in_Charge@poa.st
2025-03-17T22:38:33.488795Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@jeffcliff @SuperSnekFriend Tell that to the Taliban, or New Guinea tribesmen, or the Han Chinese, or Indians fresh off the boat working in Silicon Valley, or the blacks living in the South Side of Chicago, or Egyptians, or Ukrainians for that matter. Literally every other ethnic groups, every other demographic outside of white leftists see themselves as distinct cultures, and wish to maintain themselves as such. Listen to what this wise black man has to say on the matter.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HqiWFLsgVi4
(DIR) Post #As9xrahy03fARfDFnU by jeffcliff@shitposter.world
2025-03-17T22:39:24.212884Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@Charles_in_Charge @SuperSnekFriend > e than a soulless economic zone,since souls don't exist that's *all* 'economic zones'>, the only reason to cooperate is to make moneyBullshit. There's plenty of reasons to cooperate with people other than money.
(DIR) Post #As9xwrLbYx4bV0GVqC by jeffcliff@shitposter.world
2025-03-17T22:40:21.831899Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@Charles_in_Charge @SuperSnekFriend I have and do.
(DIR) Post #As9yL77mYVfPNfMi6S by SuperSnekFriend@poa.st
2025-03-17T22:44:45.154594Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@jeffcliff @Charles_in_Charge >since souls don't existI'd rather not transform this into a Christian vs secular humanist hellthread.>There's plenty of reasons to cooperate with people other than money.We agree, but people who believe your statement yet who see nations and larger people groups as completely arbitrary zones are not being internally consistent. This problem would still apply even if you added incentives like "not wanting to go war" or "cross cultural appreciation". Those are flimsy reasons for cross-national cooperation that can go away at the drop of a bomb, bad political decision, or even one angry sentence like the what Vance did to Zelensky last month that has risked American-European relations since.
(DIR) Post #As9yTe7Nlofa1cFMQK by Charles_in_Charge@poa.st
2025-03-17T22:46:17.730710Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@jeffcliff @SuperSnekFriend Even if you're not religious, surely you understand when someone says something is soulless, don't you?If you believe culture, history, and the other traditional bonds between people are meaningless, what reason other than money is there for people from different nation/group/ethnicities to cooperate? Seriously, if spiritual, historical, and cultural bonds are irrelevant, what else is there but the material?
(DIR) Post #As9ygOzFL59yrRWX3o by jeffcliff@shitposter.world
2025-03-17T22:48:35.107375Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@Charles_in_Charge @SuperSnekFriend > Even if you're not religious, surely you understand when someone says something is soulless, don't you?It means their thinking and language is deluding them and they are at risk of falling prey to those who would take advantage of them by promising 'soulful' economic behaviour.> If you believe culture, history, and the other traditional bonds between people are meaninglessI don't.
(DIR) Post #As9yxMzI1eH5aDdQBM by jeffcliff@shitposter.world
2025-03-17T22:51:38.881379Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@SuperSnekFriend @Charles_in_Charge > arger people groups as completely arbitrary zones are not being internally consistent.Of course they aren't. They are made from real flesh and blood human beings. Human beings contain multitudes, and are inconsistent sometimes.> Those are flimsy reasons for cross-national cooperationAvoiding war isn't a flimsy reason in the age of MADWe have to actually understand and value not going to war, otherwise war can happen, though.
(DIR) Post #As9z0Hb6WRTXjciA76 by Charles_in_Charge@poa.st
2025-03-17T22:52:11.356336Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@jeffcliff @SuperSnekFriend The video is one where Muhammad Ali was interviewed on a BBC show back in the 60's. Nothing gory or vulgar, I promise. The interviewer sounds very much like a modern day leftist. I don't doubt you would come away calling Ali and idiot and racist as well, but the point is that, again, only white leftists think this way. Literally every other group, including the ones leftist seek to help, believe the opposite of you. Leftists have no problem railing against whites that disagree with them, but somehow manage to glide right past when black and brown people say the exact same things.
(DIR) Post #As9z4ENmPvOMvFMTrM by jeffcliff@shitposter.world
2025-03-17T22:52:54.054673Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@Charles_in_Charge @SuperSnekFriend I don't give a fuck. It's copyright-restricted garbage and you're wasting my time with it, just like you waste everyone else's time with your poorly thought through attempts to divide humanity.
(DIR) Post #As9z7Mgc05j9XpfG9A by SuperSnekFriend@poa.st
2025-03-17T22:53:28.316241Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@jeffcliff @Charles_in_Charge >Of course they aren't.If you agree with that, why are responding like you don't. Me no understand. :jahy_baka:
(DIR) Post #As9zs2jA1bKXFn79uK by ceo_of_monoeye_dating@lab.nyanide.com
2025-03-17T23:01:53.590201Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@SuperSnekFriend @Charles_in_Charge @jeffcliff This one is actually wrong.[x] people group can be not-[x] people group if both sets are empty (for example, if there are no people - which happens to be true if you are in an NAACP meeting)
(DIR) Post #AsA0WDHIDY9BYiEZo8 by Charles_in_Charge@poa.st
2025-03-17T23:09:10.240546Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@jeffcliff @SuperSnekFriend Soulless: definition :having no soul or no greatness or warmth of mind or feelingExamples: -a government run by soulless bureaucrats-These companies are heartless, soulless, money-making machines.-The houses in the new development are completely soulless.Synonyms:cold blooded, heartless, inhumane, insensate, pitiless, inhuman, remorselessYou can not "build from" cultures without effectively erasing them. Ask black people if they want to build from their culture until it vanishes, melding with white culture, Chinese culture, Indian culture, etc. Ask those other people the same question, offer them the same deal, and see what kind of response you get. Because it's interesting these arguments are only every aimed at white non-leftists. Not at blacks or Hispanics or Asians or Indians or anyone else. We've noticed that, understood it, and so we are rejecting it, as are more and more normies. No one, I mean no one of any ethnicity, is buying what the left is selling, not any more. That's what is at the heart of the shift we're seeing. Liberalism is a dead letter, it's just that leftists haven't accepted that fact yet. No one wants to live in the cultural equivalent of a brutalist building ruled by soulless technocratic overlords.
(DIR) Post #AsA1ElktOOxLELKDPE by jeffcliff@shitposter.world
2025-03-17T23:17:11.648623Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@Charles_in_Charge @SuperSnekFriend >. Because it's interesting these arguments are only every aimed at white non-leftists. Not at blacks or Hispanics or Asians or Indians or anyone else.I have gotten into this shit with other groups, including asians, hispanics and indians just fine. You just weren't there. > No one wants to live blahblahI really don't care if you want to live or not. Actually I'd prefer you just fucking die already.>You can not "build from" cultures without effectively erasing themCultures change with time and as people adapt what works and what doesn't and keep the parts of history alive that is important to them. A diverse society is rich with culture and history.Generally, I'm not interested in your bullshit semantic argument and this thread is going right to mute.
(DIR) Post #AsAC7LkInPZa22iJ72 by SockPuppet@lab.nyanide.com
2025-03-18T01:19:07.804293Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@Charles_in_Charge @SuperSnekFriend Orania is the future.