Utopia Talk / Politics / keep up the good work seb #2

Cherub Cow Member	Thu Dec 05 13:08:27 Previous thread: http://uto...hread=93589&time=1733424146201
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Dec 05 13:08:43 Long post is LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG • [Nim]: "Seb, in the most perfect autist bureaucrat manner, just used a mathematical theorem as a thought terminating cliche." Yeah it's incredible, lol. Super Aspy lol stuff though ;D • [jergfag (lazy cretin)]: "So we have established that genetics are unimportant beyond spurious skin tone correlations you might have imagined." False premise. Straw man fallacy / disingenuous misrepresentation. Jergul Method fallacies. Just read the last comment in this thread: http://uto...hread=93537&time=1733407647812 If you feel like responding to me after you read it, go re-read it, then go fuck yourself, you sundowning boomer. .. .. • [sebfag (agnosia-sufferer)]: "That wasn't quite how things worked then. There were crown territories all over the world that were "Britain", and the Home isles didn't have a distinct legal identity until a bit later on when you start to get a clear concept of Dominion within empire in the 1870s." • [sebfag (agnosia-sufferer)]: "If you'd been wondering around British India loudly saying "No, these people are not British, and this land is not Britain" you would probably come under scrutiny from the British state as some kind of deviant subversive rebel." • [sebfag (agnosia-sufferer)]: "Sam's brain not being able to quite compute the idea that British Subject was the same legal status of everyone." There is no lie that sebfag will not tell if it leads to the annihilation of the West. We can literally sit here listing the laws that were effected for the changes sebfag mentions here, but he will just disingenuously pretend that time all happened all at once or that the fact of incrementalism itself makes it acceptable for a knife to slip a little closer to the artery. So even though the colonies literally were composed of foreign *subjects* who did *not* have rights in England proper and did *not* have representation in England proper, sebfag will just *lie* by saying it was all "Britain" in yet another of his evil semantic distortions. But it was the *Englishman* who was recognized as English under the Crown — *not* just random foreign subjects in India who were pressed into service. No Englishman was confused about who was who when fighting Zulu warriors, and no Englishman worth anything would think by such suicidal agnosia, and were he to do so he would be rightly seen as a traitor, which is what seb is. It is a pure representation of sebfag's Koala-like agnosia to pretend that Britain was just "[everything and nothing and it's all meaningless]" rather than a distinct set of territories with specific local laws and requirements in the expanded colonies and specific local laws, customs, peoples, and requirements in England proper. It was even a ubiquitous concept that England proper was the City upon a Hill and the rest of the world needed to be fixed because it was largely a bunch of bomalian savages. I.e., it is a category error to pretend that there was never any distinction between England's expanded empire and England proper. There is an entire historical record proving sebfag to be a liar that includes local compacts, treaties, and governorships, but sebfag does not care since he has no conscience, hates the West, and wants a White genocide. Nobody was fucking *retarded* enough to think that some Indian who wanted to burn a widow under "Sati" was just as English as anyone, just as only fucking retards today think that an Afghani goat-herder can be an Englishman if he's just given a piece of paper. In fact, a popular semi-apocryphal story that frequently makes the rounds is that Indian savages wanted to keep burning their wives because that was their backwards savage custom, but Englishman Lord William Bentinck told the Indians that burning women was murder and executing murderers was the English custom, hence Sati was outlawed in India. These realities do not fit into sebfag's worldview because he has to pretend that only *post*-colonialism exists, which is where backwards savages from India bring Sati to England but Englishman can no longer recognize that India is mostly full of backwards savages who should be kept in India. Hence, by sebgfag logic, even though >95% of England was White in 1985, it is totally fine if England becomes >95% Indian — it's all "Britain"! By sebfag logic, things change, but also, they're simultaneously exactly the same because change isn't real and there are no distinctions between anything and we're all numbers because math is a thing in and of itself (lol). If that's the case, then is it not acceptable to send all of the brown-"Englishmen" to India to improve India, since India is just "Britain" and those "Englishmen" would just be going to more "Britain" and nothing is distinct or different in the global soup and actually it's just a weird coincidence that all the brown people are being sent there and brown people aren't real anyways? Oh, yeah, that's right, it's only acceptable to sebfag in the way that disempowers, disenfranchises, and kills White people. Colonialism is "racist" when White people do it for the genetic uplift of the countries that they governed under the Empire, but if brown people colonize England and the West and apply dysgenics to its people with a mind for genocide, then it's not even happening and Western culture doesn't exist anyways and there's "somehow" not even a way to measure it. Also, inherent in the British Empire's understanding of "Britain" is *not* that you could go to a colony and pretend that British India is Britain in the sense that [there is a difference which has to be noted] (British India) while simultaneously pretending that [there is no difference] (Britain). That's the same retard agnosia-logic that delusional left-wing faggots use when they have to say that "trans-women are women". Umm, no, they're fucking not. Similarly, an Englishman in India would *know* that he's an Englishman in savage India, and what he would call "Britain" among India would therefore be where *Englishman* had successfully *improved* India and *molded* it into their English vision. They would not walk into an un-improved Indian slum with untouchables standing in shit rivers and say, "[Ah, England]." The phrase was "make the world England," and it was so ubiquitous that Jane Austen was championing it in "Mansfield Park" (1814) and James Fenimore Cooper preserved it in "The Last of the Mohicans: A Narrative of 1757" (1826). Just as the "trans-woman" would be deluded in thinking that his body could become a woman's in an act of hatred against his own real body, so too would an Englishman be deluded in thinking that England could be made by a foreign body that hates England. An Eagle would not call a sparrow's nest home but would build her nest where she goes. • [sebfag (agnosia-sufferer)]: "There is no such pure prime population" Now do Israel. The jews use this same strategy to genocide Palestinians. They're not real! Palestine isn't even a real state! It never existed! Similarly, by your anti-White ideology, "White people aren't real! They never existed! These are moments in history that can disappear so there's no difference between them disappearing in 10 years or 4000! 1985 was both five minutes ago and 10,000 years ago! "[White people have never existed as a cohesive group]" is an anti-White canard used by genocidal Bolsheviks, and sebfag is freely adopting it because he is anti-White. • [sebfag (agnosia-sufferer)]: "Imagine going back to 1850 and talking to a white guy born in North America and telling him he wasn't British." sebfag just fucked that up. He meant to lie by saying that a colonist was "British" (his semantic distortion which would fail its own test), but he said the wrong year (likely he meant 1750). So, yeah, actually, in 1850, a White man born in North America was probably American — not British. But a White man born in America *would* recognize the *reality* of English ancestry if he had it, since genetics is absolutely and irrevocably real and the Founding Fathers were proud to have English ancestry while simultaneously proving their worth and eugenicist abilities on their own new continent as Americans, whereas sebfag's pieces of paper saying that Ash Sarkar is British are actually fake. • [sebfag (agnosia-sufferer)]: "And of course there you are once again happily lining up with you would be deporters ... CC is here advocating their property be confiscated and deported" • [sebfag (agnosia-sufferer)]: "if applied in your country would mean you and your kids being bundled into a plane to Iran" Stop telling this fucking lie, you fucking liar. I literally just laid out exactly who would be deported, and guess what! Nim would not be deported! You would be, though! Stop fucking lying! Leftist trying not to create resentment and anti-White hatred based on racial profiling challenge: impossible. • [sebfag (agnosia-sufferer)]: "Only it wasn't, CC actually confirmed she absolutely does mean a program of ruthless ethnic cleansing and property theft by the state, based on skin colour." You absolute fucking liar. Quote me, you piece of shit liar. You cannot because you fucking lied, you fucking liar. • [sebfag (agnosia-sufferer)]: "CC did in fact confirm she does have a figure in mind that falling below constitute an unacceptable situation for the state that overrides all our traditions of property rights and freedom." Overrides? False. You are a fucking liar. What was overridden is that as recently as 1985 England was >95% White, but somehow in your evil and genocidal ideology "all our traditions of property rights and freedom" began once that 95% figure plummeted following a series of genocidal immigration policies that you favor. • [Sam Adams]: "These slaves arent white, therefore the confederacy isn't white." • [sebfag (agnosia-sufferer)]: "Correct me if I'm wrong, but slaves in the confederacy weren't considered equal in law. I believe that's rather definitional." No, Sam is right, sebfag! :D Just be ideologically consistent! :D There's no difference between a slave and a confederate soldier! I mean, would it make sense for a slave on a Mississippi plantation in 1850 to say to other slaves, "No, these people are not Confederates. This is not the Confederacy." Of course not! The Confederacy is anything we want it to be! We're in the Confederacy right *now*! Raise your flags! \:D/ In fact, slaves on Confederate plantations had the *same* rights as Confederate land-owners. This is true retroactively because current black people have rights so 1850 black people now have them too and always did. And slaves weren't even black. Black people do not exist as a historically recognized group. I mean, that's even a made up word — "black". Plus, there are like, a lot of countries in Africa. So like, an 1850 slave isn't black, he's probably Nigerian or Congolese or English or Laotian. There's honestly no way to tell since genetics are not real. And actually, while we're at it, the Congolese are not even Congolese, really. That's not a historically recognized nation and borders aren't real either. Well, that is, the Chinese Lithium-mine speculators are just as Congolese as any Congolese person who's been there for however long. Because China also isn't a real nation. I mean, the Mongols invaded a few times, so like, the Chinese don't even exist as a real people and never have. There's no reason that China can't accept 1 billion Indians, since Indians aren't real either and neither is China and we wouldn't even be able to tell if it happened even if it did, especially if the paperwork were in order. • [murderfag (left-wing dogma bot)]: "a peculiar sort of conservative. The sort that wants the government regulating, dictating, and managing, everything." • [CC]: "Absolutely false. That is antithetical to anything I've ever said. You are a liar." • [murder (left-wing dogma bot)]: "You want the government to..." Oh no! murdertard is right! He got me! D: Oh wait, no, he's a fucking retard and he just cemented his absolute retardation. murdertard's error here is the same sort of retarded error made by "open borders libertarians". They think that the non-aggression principle and free market principles mean, "[I can replace all of my local workers with an Indian call center and a Chinese slave labor farm because free market, baby!]" Umm fucking no. Similarly, these "open borders libertarian" types have no concept of treason, since in their minds, "[what even is a nation? Just give the traitors passports and change the laws about what's illegal, bro]" But there is an obvious error here: a nation must protect its *own* citizens, otherwise it is not a nation. A nation needs the consent of the governed! So going down the list that murdertard presented (comment "Thu Dec 05 01:59:21") but restated from the obvious and self-preserving perspective of nationhood: • A nation should not be providing free routine medical care within its own borders to foreigners who hate and undermine the nation • A nation should control its own lands, not allow foreigners to hold lands and use those lands against the nation • A nation should recognize its sovereign property, which it recognizes as the private property of its *own* citizens — *not* the property of foreign speculators and conquerors • A nation should control its own finances, not allow international financiers to determine its destiny by controlling all of its own money • [murdertard's "lives and dies" one is such a straw man that I'm not sure what he's talking about] • A nation should have its own language and should absolutely protect free speech, unlike the totalitarian-left Democrats who insist on a monopoly on speech and an Overton Window where the only acceptable speech is that which destroys the nation • [murdertard lied about "political speech", so that's another invention of his] • [murdertard lied about "how people live their lives", so another invention. Is that about gay people? That's not "how people live their lives" — it's degeneracy that definitionally cannot produce Sacred life and therefore should not be honored as Sacred] • A nation must have a people, and its *own* people must have a Posterity — it *must* have children for its own survival — not by force in some leftist's smutty Handmaid's Tale rape fantasy but by the absolute necessity of life itself! — and those who do not have children should indeed pay taxes for the general welfare (as opposed to the dysgenic leftist welfare) of the nation and *its* people! • [murdertard lied about "a welfare class" here; that's false; I said "tax break", which is not welfare; welfare is money given whereas a tax break is just keeping your own money from your own Good Works. Is he retarded? Oh yeah, he is.] • A nation should realize that marriage is a Sacred institution among a man and a woman since only through this pairing can there be progeny and Posterity, and a nation should realize that only the marriage of its *own* people are of the nation — not the marriages of foreigners, whether those be in distant lands or smugglers and conquerors who have stolen into its border. How else could it be a nation! • A nation should protect the religions of its *own* people, not the religions of foreigners, conquerors, and subversives who pray to their foreign idols and devils • A nation should protect the property and Prosperity of its *own* citizens, not give the finances of its citizens to foreign nations without their consent and/or against the interests of its *own* citizens. • [murderfag (left-wing dogma bot)]: "I'm not a liar. You want the government regulating, dictating, and managing, everything." So yes, you *are* a liar. All of the things you listed were sick distortions of the principles in which I actually believe. • [murderfag (left-wing dogma bot)]: "You're a fascist." Let's notice, then, that the very idea of a nation with borders that protects its own people is "fascist" in the world of the left-wing dogma bot. Again, this is because leftism is a sickness. It is a suicidal ideology. In murderfag's suicidal world, you cannot have borders. That's "fascist"! Who are *you* to say who lives in *our* home? In murderfag's suicidal world, you cannot own property or land. That's "fascist"! Who are *you* to keep the things you earned, fought for, and defend? *Anyone* should have *our* land and property, regardless of whether or not they can get out of bed, work, provide food, build shelters, defend society, or create anything at all. Give me your stuff, "fascist"! In murderfag's suicidal world, you should not be allowed to stop the immigration of foreigners, conquerors, traitors, and people who hate your nation. That's "fascist"! Who are *you* to stop people from stabbing you in the front or the back?? Who are *you* to stop people from killing you and taking everything that you and your ancestors have built for hundreds of years?? In murderfag's suicidal world, you should not be allowed to stop foreign banks and financiers from using your own wealth to destroy you and your nation. That's "fascist"! Who are *you* to stop bureaucrats from stealing all of *our* wealth that you earned for *us*?? Who are *you* to not want people who hate you to take your money and use it to pay your enemies to destroy you?? "Fascist"!! Leftism has no survival instinct. murdertard is like the cordyceps beetle dutifully walking to the place where its death is meant to give life to a foreign entity that cannot even be said to care about the beetle's existence. There is no principle that murdertard holds which would protect himself, his own people, or his own future. In fact he has loudly proclaimed that he has no people, since in his suicidal march to the spore's hatchery he has adopted absolute atomization in ignorant defiance of Meditation 17. All he knows is that he hates having a consciousness. He hates being alive. And rather than crawl under a porch like a dying dog that wishes to spare its family the smell out of a self-doubting but pitiable love, his dying wish is to bring to an absolute end all of the consciousnesses of all of those who live at the moment just before or just after he himself dies, since then, finally, he would remember what it was like to be an infant in his mother's arms. • [sebfag (agnosia-sufferer)]: "The abolitionist movement wasn't as accident. If race and skin colour was as foundational as you and CC suggest, Britain wouldn't have been the driving force behind global abolition of slavery." This is such a stupid idea that I'm honestly impressed. It's false, of course, and absolutely backwards. In reality — and I have explained this hundreds of times now since this is the central explanation of ending slave morality and ending the false dichotomy of the Master–slave dialectic — the simple fact is that some genetic beings are better positioned to resist both enslavement of others *and* their own slavery. A certain level of strength, intelligence, second-ordering thinking, and eugenics (etc.) is required to achieve this kind of person. Yes, eugenics. Eugenics is not "bad thing" just because big-Hitler-man gave you a bad taste. All species should improve. All species *must* improve to ensure their own survival. Rejecting this is rejecting evolution itself and its grand history while using the consciousness that you have to do it *because* of evolution's eugenic role. So why does this mean that you got it absolutely backwards? Britain, like you yourself just *admitted*, was "the driving force behind global abolition of slavery." Now who was the genetic stock of Britain when that occurred? Who pushed for that everywhere they went? Majority White people. Who most strongly pushed for the Slave Trade Act of 1807? William Wilberforce, a White Englishman. And what other eugenic policies did he support? • Converting jews to Christianity, with judaism being a slave doctrine which is dysgenic and Christianity thus being able to end their dysgenic slavery • A society for stopping animal abuse (oh no! Hitler was a vegetarian and wanted to protect animals too! What could this mean?! Why did Hemingway breed polydactyl cats?? Why did the English create so many dog breeds?? What could it mean?!) • An end to dueling (Oh no! Who died in dueling?? Some of England's best genetic stock is who! Why would Wilberforce want to stop England's best genetic stock from dying??) • An end to porn distribution (Oh no! Who was distributing the porn?? Why is porn bad?? Why is healthy family formation among Englishmen good??) Oops. sebfag just praised a eugenicist with "fascist" tendencies as well as praised the political will of White people. And we see what the alternate is and what sebfag supports. Did black people end slavery? lol no. Africa *still* practices slavery, and many black people in these United States fantasize about *enslaving* White people, since that is slave morality's need to invert society and that is the genetic imperative of enslavers and slaves. Did India end slavery? lol no. India *still* practices slavery, their caste system *still* defines "Untouchables", and even in the West, Indian imports will assure others that they are the high "Brahmin" class while pushing for policies that enslave people that they believe are weak and beneath them or who are above them and who they therefore resent and want to bring to heel. As a simple genetic question, most world populations are slavish enslavers. Their will upon the world is to enslave people, and to do this they must destroy the best genetic stock of their "enemies", since the best genetic stock of any given society is the most likely to abandon the wheel of master/slave — to resist their own enslavement and annihilation. White people are the most likely *not* enslave themselves or others. Did jews end slavery? Oops! No! Who owned the slave ships? jews! D: Why do jews keep pushing dysgenic bio-weapons into the West?? Oops! Because it degrades the genetic gains of White Westerners and reduces them to the position of an enslaveable race. Why are similar genetic slaves/enslavers among BRICS+ using the same strategy against the West? Oops! Because dysgenics favors slavery, and BRICS+ wants to enslave the West! Your totalitarian Regime wants to kill White people because White people have consistently proven through genetic gains to be those who end slavery. If an enslaver/slave people wants to be "Masters" (enslavers) over the world, then they have to make everyone else into a slave, and they do this by destroying the genetic chances of all other races. Is that what White Westerners have done? No. Like you yourself said (accidentally), White Westerners ended slavery. The project of English colonialism was global eugenics. In every single population in the world, there are genetically favorable people who can end enslavement dogmas within their own populations. The British Empire specifically selected *those* people to lead and improve their societies, since their eugenics would filter into their *own* people and select the best of *them* in their respective nations, ending slavery in whatever nation adopted this uplift. The end result of this, were it to have persisted, is that no nation would need to enslave any one of their own people nor any other nation's people. But sebfags choose the opposite route: post-colonialism, dysgenics, and annihilation. The ideology of the leftist is to promote the genetics of those who would enslave us all. They take the sickest and most twisted people and make sure that they have breeding rights, land, and prosperity; while siphoning away the wealth of those who actually labored for those fruits and could end enslavement dogmas. So among Norway, for instance, you could see who supports dysgenic enslavement dogmas and who supports eugenic liberty by how they would have voted in the 2024 U.S. election: http://www.statista.com/statistics/1537584/norway-perceptions-harris-trump-united-states-gender/ 70% of Norway would have voted for enslavement dogma (Harris, who is openly pro-enslavement). That means that about 70% of Norwegian genetic stock is composed of slavish-enslavers who would bring enslavement wherever they went, with their own children possessing the same genetic defect of enslavement. That is an absolutely poisoned gene pool, so I suspect that their diaspora was a brain drain. Only 10% of Norway would have voted Trump and thus only 10% of Norway is *not* dysgenic. So if you wanted to end enslavement dogmas such as lutheranism, calvinism, and judaism in Norway, you would have to empower that 10%. This is extremely easy because that 10% is already good stock, so you'd basically just have to stop stealing all of their money and stop sending their wealth to Norway's dysgenic 70% under Norway's current dysgenic social schemes. I.e., you can find out how fast your fastest runners run if you just stop putting the lead boot of the dysgenic majority on their feet. • [sebfag (agnosia-sufferer)]: "Instead what's she's trying to do is impose a very different model, a one where peoples worth is based on their skin colour, not their class." Absolutely false premise. I hope I've made that clear above. You, in your current ideology — and future ideology if you never learn a conscience — want that. You want some men to be slaves so that others can be masters. You want White people annihilated so that in the ashes dysgenic enslavement-ideology brown people can enslave each other in a war of all against all, with some hidden oligarchs breeding among themselves and protecting their genetics alone so that they can be eternal enslavers over a racially homogenized and nondescript "race of the future". You want that because you are evil, and in your evil you would take away all of the beauty of the world so that all humans — if they even survive in your world — are as replaceable and identical as any written signifier on a page, like how a "6" is just another "6" in the mind of an Aspy fool who has forgotten what was meant to be represented by those numbers in the first place and therefore ends all life in the world to balance what becomes a meaningless equation. I, meanwhile, most prize those who need no Masters and no slaves, who can work for their own vision, who do not clip the wings of birds because they resent those that can fly, and who uplift all peoples to make the best versions of all peoples. • I want Iran to have the best and most beautiful Iranians possible according to the vision of those Iranians among them who resist enslavement • I want Palestine to have the same, with their best given a chance to live free and promote their greatest wonders • I want the jews to have the same, to end their enslavement dogmas and reward those among them who honor the same in my people and all other peoples • I want the Indians to have the same, to find and promote those among them who are neither Untouchable slave nor Brahmin enslaver but instead free, strong, and brave • I want the same for the Chinese, the Syrian, the African, and the Bengali. May they all break the master/slave dialectic within their own societies, find the best of themselves, know the soul of their people, and ensure the genetic potential of themselves and their posterity so that none among them in their future will know the yoke.
murder Member	Thu Dec 05 13:27:05 1. post long list of things you want the government regulating, dictating, and managing 2. assert that wanting government to regulate, dictate, and manage everything, is antithetical to anything you've ever said 3. confronted with you're own vomit, deny that it's yours. 4. return to demanding government intervention in personal and business matters of all sorts.
Seb Member	Thu Dec 05 13:29:44 "So even though the colonies literally were composed of foreign *subjects*" What do you think England was full of? Subjects. And as I've pointed out, you have a smattering of brown skinned peers, industrialists and MPs. Absolutely, a white British Lord would think he had more in common with an Indian prince than he had in common with a white British farm laborer. "who did *not* have rights in England proper" Incorrect. Cf. Sommerset case etc. "and did *not* have representation in England proper," Which, to be fair, neither did many white people born in England. Or at least say in who represented them. The point I am making, and which you are not really addressing, is your proposition is false. There was not this 1850 view that equated nationality with skin colour and enshrined that in law. You are retroactively imagining the State would look at you - a commoner - and said "oh yes, of course, you have very special rights you have the right skin colour". There would certainly be discrimination, and it is also true that as the 19th century wore on, there was more and more distinction between people from different *parts* of the empire as boundaries started being drawn for administrative purposes became essentially national boundaries - and this helped unravel the whole empire by bringing into sharp relief in whose benefit all of this was being run. Even in 1850, Subjects of the crown in "British India" - i.e. territories in India that *were* Britain had very different rights to those belonging to Indian protectorates which were basically territories subjugated by Britain. These things mattered a *lot* more in the legal framework than skin colour - and the framework you outlined is very very differnt.
Seb Member	Thu Dec 05 13:31:27 There certainly wasn't the idea that a Brown person couldn't naturalise, and that they couldn't own property, for example - which you suggested as a policy.
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Dec 05 14:11:03 [murder (left-wing dogma bot)]: "1. post long list of things you want the government regulating, dictating, and managing 2. assert that wanting government to regulate, dictate, and manage everything, is antithetical to anything you've ever said 3. confronted with you're own vomit, deny that it's yours. 4. return to demanding government intervention in personal and business matters of all sorts." 1. False premise 2. False premise 3. False premise based on a straw man fallacy 4. False premise You're not so great with reading comprehension, are you, retard? :) For those who are not retarded: Citizens giving power to the government in exchange for the government representing *those* citizens and *their* Posterity and having the government perform its most basic functions of protecting a border, protecting its people and their Posterity, protecting its people's property, and protecting its people's works... represents the most basic functions of nearly any government throughout all of human history. murdertard, however, is so irrevocably suicidal that he thinks that those things are some kind of malicious and "fascist" government overreach, as though he is so retarded that he cannot imagine a government doing these basic functions without it precipitating his preferred government: suicidal totalitarianism. And, in practice, when these basic functions are fulfilled, there is a great deal of freedom. There is not "dictating" and "managing" of private life, since the government protects *its* citizens and their private lives. Society becomes high-trust when it is composed of its own people, and this itself facilitates a society where government intervention becomes near completely absent from view. So murder is projecting his myopia. He believes that a government that is not suicidal is "fascist", and in his myopic mind, he thinks that a government that closes the doors and then has a party must be evil because it didn't let people who hate parties crash the party. He is also projecting. He is pretending that these are some kind of extreme over-reaches, but he is simultaneously the same person who champions the current totalitarian Regime in its quest to put COVID shots in every single arm, to make baby-murder *required* among *all* states and *all* communities — even those that do not want it. He wants *no* religion to survive except his own death cult which can kill all religions by killing anyone who is capable of a consciousness. And to not be absolutely annihilated and genocided under murder's messianic totalitarian death cult that cannot help but reach into every aspect of every life and strangle it? Well, that's "fascist"! -=-=- =-=-= [sebfag (liar)]: "Absolutely, a white British Lord would think he had more in common with an Indian prince than he had in common with a white British farm laborer." Nope. You are a liar. He may appreciate a near equal across lands, but he would not abandon «noblesse oblige» for his own people. Otherwise, he would be a traitor, such as yourself, and in his time that would mean the death penalty. [sebfag (liar)]: "Incorrect. Cf. Sommerset case etc." Nope. You are a liar. And by your own previous quotation, you recognize that England would *not* allow any old "[Indian] farm laborer" just to jump on a boat to England and run for parliament. You know you're lying. You think some untouchable running around in shit water could just raise enough money to go to England, buy 500 acres of English countryside, become king, and deport all the White people? It's a delusion, sebfag. You're a liar. [CC]: ""and did *not* have representation in England proper," [Seb]: "Which, to be fair, neither did many white people born in England. Or at least say in who represented them." Wow, you just admitted a small truth. Good for you. They did not have representation. England protected its nobility from those not fit to direct its eugenics, which included its lesser births as well as foreigners. Good for you, Seb! [sebfag (liar)]: "your proposition is false. [/] There was not this 1850 view that equated nationality with skin colour and enshrined that in law." *My* proposition? What the fuck are you talking about? "1850"? Are you fucking retarded? Oh, you *are* retarded, that's why you don't realize what you've been doing, so I'll explain: I said *1950* like, *really* early within this conversation. *You* then *later* brought up "1850" at some point ("Wed Dec 04 06:05:33"), largely as a red herring which was meant to derail my original point but which I entertained because I'm willing to deal with retards and their special needs. Then — because you are too fucking retarded to keep track of the conversation — you began thinking that *I* had made *your* "1850" argument, which is why you kept bringing it up as "the" benchmark. So you once again have no idea what we're even talking about. And this is even more damning with regards to your general time-travel schizophrenia. I said, "1950" because throughout *all* of England's history it was >99.99% White — all the way until 1950. And this is indisputable and an everlasting fact of England's history. I even said that "1985" continued to be >95% White, meaning that England preserved its people as recently as about 40 years ago before the final descent into your suicidal madness. But oh! 40 years! Those are the ancient days! England can never go back! "Don't look back in anger!" And you are absolutely lying about England not codifying its ethnic population. I do not need to even cite a law, though there exist *hundreds* throughout its history. It's even more fundamental: no nation can maintain that kind of an ethnic majority for its entire history without its people having a government, a culture, and a belief in its own people which *assures* *its* survival. Laws typically are only written when scale is needed or some obvious truth was almost forgotten and has to be affirmed for the forgetful. Just because suicidal progressives only made major gains in their White genocide after 1950 does not mean that there was no law before them. Do you need to find a law in Japan's ancient history that says that Japan has to remain Japanese? Fucking *no* (well, *you* might, because you're fucking retarded). These things were codified in the very survival that a nation enforces through violence. A people that shares a common ancestry, a common purpose, and the values and culture that are produced from that ethnos will naturally want to preserve those very things by forming a nation. That does not need to be written down. [sebfag (liar)]: "You are retroactively imagining the State would look at you - a commoner - and said "oh yes, of course, you have very special rights you have the right skin colour"." Absolute lie. Straw man fallacy. I never claimed the state just gave all rights based on skin color. You're a fucking liar. If you're just gonna keep lying then you can probably just go fuck yourself, but I dunno, maybe try again or something, whatever.
Seb Member	Thu Dec 05 14:25:04 "Nope. You are a liar. He may appreciate a near equal across lands, but he would not abandon «noblesse oblige» for his own people." Ah yes, that much observed noblesse oblige! Always reliable. It's also true that he wouldn't consider it a violation of his noblesse oblige in any way shape or form to sell property to said individual or let him bring his coloured household to live on that property. In fact, he would consider it highly impertinent if a delegation of his leaseholders got together and petitioned him not to rather than his duty to comply with their wishes. You are doing a lot of heavy lifting to think noblesse oblige would somehow translate into the kind of sweeping race laws that you outlined. "Otherwise, he would be a traitor" Again, no, you are retrospectively imposing an idea of a sovereign people to a time when sovereignty was very definitely bound up with the crown, and parliament, and the house of lords was the centre of power. Treachery would mean an act against the crown, not upsetting the social mores of a bunch of commoners when conducting a business transaction with a fellow gentleman. "*My* proposition? What the fuck are you talking about?" The big long list of policies you suggested the current British govt should adopt. Yes, I brought up 1850, and then pointed out even in 1850 there was nothing as obscene as your little Third Reich inspired blood laws on who gets to be a person with rights and own property; and like a fucking muppet you decided to argue the point. The stuff you were rambling on about to keep England "white" is a far greater rejection of everything it means to be English than this idea that somehow the English stops being English if the average skin tone is too brown.
Seb Member	Thu Dec 05 14:33:21 Here is what I think is the basic problem. You, as a mediocre white person in the US used to being the default and discriminating against brown people; now find you have provoked strong racial identities in the hitherto marginalised population of the US. You are struggling to find an identity of your own, and you and all the deranged folks that feel threatened by this are hawking around for an imagined "European" identity you can anchor yourselves to. But I'm sorry, you guys culturally are not remotely of our tradition or values. You are your own thing (in the same way Africans do not find cultural resonance with nth generation African Americans) and you need to find your own identity compatible with the reality that America isn't a white state, it's a post-colonial melange. The fact that European countries don't conform to the racial sui-generis groups you feel they need to in order to provide ballast and heft to your otherwise shallow cultural identity doesn't make us traitors. It makes you a bloody tourist, trying to appropriate our culture like a jacket to cover your nakedness. You aren't of us, you don't understand us, and the only groups you are connected to are similarly lost Brits that have lost their identity as being working class (blue collar you'd say) bread-winners in heavy industry in a society that has embraced equal rights for women and outsourced low value metal bashing to China.
Seb Member	Thu Dec 05 14:34:27 Basically, you are indeed the true heirs of the Confederacy - cosplaying at an imagined idea of Englishness in lieu of having your own culture.
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Dec 05 15:58:54 • [sebfag (disingenuous leftist)]: "You, as a mediocre white person in the US" Oof, bad call, faggot. You might want to try that «ad hom» on someone who's clearly too retarded to breath, like Dukfag or murdertard. Go measure your little boy penis elsewhere. • [sebfag (disingenuous leftist)]: "now find you have provoked strong racial identities in the hitherto marginalised population of the US." *I* provoked them? Lol, no. As I itemized in extreme detail in the Totalitarians threads, destroyer Bolsheviks such as yourself had to explicitly infiltrate corporate governance, establish "sustainability" governance through a government–banking anti-competitive pyramid scheme and protection racket, siphon the funds of the taxpayer (i.e., the funds of those people who actually support and work for the West) to Marxist projects which explicitly fund and propagandize "historically marginalized" people so that they'll become resentful anti-West destroyers, your Regime leveraged NGO networks subsidized by the ESG/DEI sustainability scam to import millions of foreign invaders as useful-idiot voting blocs, your Bolshevik Regime attempted to shut out all competing anti-propaganda networks and narratives, and after all of that your Bolshevik scum couldn't get enough enthusiasm to rig the 2024 U.S. election for Harris or stop the dissident right's "Zero Seats" Uni-Party-crushing scheme in England (a consequence that you still fail to understand). In other words, the resentment of that "marginalised population" is so manufactured and so Astro-Turfed that it requires all of your opposition's wealth to fund it, and it still fails, because no one wants to follow dysgenic freaks to the Bastille when they know that it's all a sick twisted game by fucktards like you. So weird that when they know who's actually leading the slave revolt, they just want to stay home on election day! • [sebfag (cowardly little bitch)]: "You are struggling to find an identity of your own, and you and all the deranged folks that feel threatened by this are hawking around for an imagined "European" identity you can anchor yourselves to." lol. Absolutely weak theory-of-mind attempt. Do you think I didn't know who my parents were before Bolshevik propaganda amped up in 2016? Do you think I didn't know the names of my great-grandparents? Do you think I didn't know where the graves of my ancestors are located? I was talking about this *decades* ago in these very forums. Weird that I didn't need your faggoty little slave revolt to know who I was. It's almost like knowing who I am was a bulwark against your Bolshevism. Go try that White-guilt-inducement shitfaggery with someone else. • [sebfag (Bolshevik swine)]: "But I'm sorry, you guys culturally are not remotely of our tradition or values ... You aren't of us, you don't understand us" Given that you are a Bolshevik swine and not an Englishman, I agree! \:D/ By your *own* admission via semantic distortion, even if you *were* White or even an Englishman, by "[your] tradition", that is not even a thing so you could not possibly even be that thing! Because there is nothing — by your *own* admission — which differentiates an Englishman in England and an Indian Untouchable in a stream of shit-water, then we can presume that you in your puddle of shit are completely antithetical to the values of we in the West who are anchored to its actual traditions, peoples, lands, and everlasting cultural values. Pro-Western peoples have nothing remotely in common with the tradition of Bolsheviks and international cliques of rootless cosmopolitans, and since — by your own admission — there is no distinction between England and the remote corners of the forsaken empire, you will gladly move to the ends of the empire to some corner of Bangladesh and tend to the needs of Ash Sarkar to prove your love of rootlessness. After all! Bangladesh is just as much "Britain" as England proper — by your own admission. Surely, if you believe what you're saying — which is by your own admission — you are completely willing to embrace the kind of agnosia that sees no difference between London's traditional brick pathways and Bangladesh's.... whatever. Since — by your own admission — there is no amount of metamorphosis which could take place, no amount of parts swapped out of Theseus' ship by foreign hands that Theseus would rather cut off, and no amount of changing one modular widget for another.. that you could now claim exists which gives you an excuse to live in England versus Bangladesh versus Nagpur versus Benghazi. It is all "Britain" — by your own admission. • You admit that White is some non-cohesive idea, so you yourself cannot be White. • You admit that being English is some expansive and incomprehensible empire, like Venice or some other sinking Italo Calvino Invisible City, and so you cannot be English, since everyone is English, and all cities are sinking. • You admit that England is not a people, and England is not a culture, since people change and culture is just some jelly that can fill a shape, so you are not a people, and you have no culture. • So you are nothing and no one. You have no people. You have no culture. You have no land. There is nothing which makes you unique, lasting, true, or even human. You are a replaceable widget performing a function until your efficiency numbers decrease and hands that you do not comprehend nor oppose simply pull you out of the shape your body has filled and replace you with some other goo. Wow! Very West! Much English! :D • [sebfag (not a go-getter)]: "it's a post-colonial melange." That's your problem right there, sport! You don't have a "can do" attitude! You see, there are Bolsheviks who keep running tallies of the dropping percentage of White people in these United States because they're openly anti-White destroyers engaging in a policy of genocide, but that's the "is" of the situation — that's "it [*is*] a post-colonial melange" kind of thinking. But we're talking synergy here! We're talking forward-thinking! We're talking game, we're talking future, and we're talking winning! We're talking "can be" and "will be". See, if you think that 40 years of demographic replacement is an expansive and irreversible course of history that symbolizes our absolute triumph over those pesky "Nazis", then deporting all the traitors to the West in 10 years won't be a big deal either! After all, what's an "expansive and irreversible course of history" divided by 4? 10. That's right. 10 years. We can do it! Set a strong goal, show up every day to make it happen, and throw commies out of helicopters. That's how we win! Gooooooo Team! \:D/ • [sebfag (traitor)]: "doesn't make us traitors." You being a traitor makes you a traitor. You absolutely opposing the West, its people, its foundations, its everlasting culture, and its everlasting traditions... that's what makes you a traitor. • [sebfag (cowardly little bitch)]: "Ah yes, that much observed noblesse oblige! Always reliable." Ah, so no argument, just that faggoty little Jon Stewart mugging trick of saying the thing but with a stupid tone. Good job, faggot! • [sebfag (cowardly little bitch)]: "It makes you a bloody tourist, trying to appropriate our culture like a jacket to cover your nakedness." Ooo! The "tourist" projection again! I'm just as English as you, sebfag! By your own reasoning, a piece of paper makes me the same as you. That's what you believe in. You're a 'tourist' in the wide world, and you'd be equally at home in the "Britain" of Bangladesh. :) [sebfag (cowardly little bitch)]: "You are doing a lot of heavy lifting to think noblesse oblige would somehow translate into the kind of sweeping race laws that you outlined." If you think I did a single-variable explanation for all of society there then you're even more fucking retarded than I could ever have imagined. You even had to misrepresent my citation of the concept, you disingenuous piece of shit. But as for "sweeping race laws", again, I merely have to point to the fact of White history, which is a people that actively managed to conserve their genetics for thousands of years. If people were merely ions diffusing in a glass of water, then the "race of the future" (a global homogenized brown blob) would have emerged thousands of years ago. But people are inherently social, they stick to their family, their tribe, their state, their nation — the nation forms from this core ethnos. Every other people in the world is allowed to recognize this, but your anti-White genocidal policies prohibit it in your own land, since you are a traitor. But you cannot forcibly diffuse a specific race of people who have lasted for thousands of years by using anti-White politics in the blink of 40 years and pretend that it's a meaningless fact of a physical/materialist space simply because the diffusion is now happening. Those are obvious deterministic and materialistic fallacies that wrongly and through egregious stupidity conclude that people are no different from any other laboratory condition where one hydrogen atom is no different from another — no "6" different from any other "6". You'll come to realize that your lie that nothing is real unless it's on the false reality of paper (an absolute inversion) is as useful as the belief that a bullet cannot enter the skull of an anti-White anti-West destroyer. The people who know what reality *is* and know how it works will not even look to see if your piece of paper says that anti-White genocide is "okay", they will simply see that you are an enemy — a traitor — and that you had all the chances that they could give you. Then, somehow, in the absence of such traitors, they'd have an ethnos again. And they wouldn't even need to write it down for it to be real! Weird! Weird, too, how somehow it *was* written down in these United States! It was *explicitly* written down that these United States were founded for White people of good character and their Posterity (i.e., their White European-origin progeny)! And "somehow" the same exact rhetorical sebbish deception is playing out here! Weird! Unpredictable! Almost like it doesn't matter if it was written down at all! Almost like your "[erm, sure, there are 200 laws, but show me 500 laws!]" bullshit red herring is not even the real issue. You would justify White genocide in these United States as freely as you're justifying White genocide in England. It's because you are evil. [CC]: ""Otherwise, he would be a traitor" [sebfag (traitor to the West)]: "Again, no," Umm, again false. He would be a traitor. He would be fucking hanged by his neck until he was dead or else had his fucking head cut off, and everyone in the crowd would be saying, "Well of course! That's no Englishman to me! Betraying his own people! For shame! Bring out the next one! Pip pip innit?" [sebfag (traitor to the West)]: "Treachery would mean an act against the crown, not upsetting the social mores of a bunch of commoners" Absolutely false. You're just gonna keep fucking lying. You think there was never any little village where someone punched an English soldier and was executed for actions against the Crown? Of fucking *course* that motherfucker is getting his head lopped off. Stop fucking lying. [CC]: "*My* proposition? What the fuck are you talking about?" [sebfag (obvious and shameless liar)]: "The big long list of policies you suggested the current British govt should adopt. [/] Yes, I brought up 1850," This is like sebfag's Rick James moment: "Come on, what am I gonna do? Just all of a sudden jump up and grind my feet on somebody's couch like it's something to do? Come on. I got a little more sense then that ... Yeah, I remember grinding my feet on Eddie's couch." sebfag just pretending that *my* "proposition" was a "big long list", then in the very next moment admitting that *he* brought up 1850 in a blatant and egregious distortion of my "proposition" is the most coked-up short-term fucktardery he's done in a long while. [sebfag (obvious and shameless liar)]: "and then pointed out even in 1850 there was nothing as obscene as your little Third Reich inspired blood laws on who gets to be a person with rights and own property;" Yes, I remember that you fucking lied. You don't need to repeat your lies. We know that they're lies and that you are a liar. In reality, England was 99.99% White in 1850, just like England was 99.99% White in 1950, and your Godwin's Law faggotry doesn't change that. • (1850, 99.99% White) — "[Ermagerdz! England in 1850 were proto-Nazis! They didn't have it on enough paper to satisfy sebtard, but somehow they totally were and were not White because Germans were White and so were the English but also White isn't real and if you pretend that England was actually the entire expanded colony of random brown people around the world then actually England is a small percentage of White people but also White people don't exist so as the limit approaches infinity the solution is zero!]" • (1945, 99.99% White) — "[Ermagerdz! England defeated the Nazis!]" • (1950, 99.99% White) — "[Ermagerdz! England in 1950 are Nazis!]" • (1985, >95% White) — "[Ermagerdz! England is still full of Nazis!]" • (2011, 82.8% White) — "[Ermagerdz! We're still surrounded by Nazis! Import more brown people! No law ever said we couldn't do this, which is why we had to make a bunch of laws to do this!]" • (2024, 80% White) — "[Ermagerdz! CC is literally a 'fascist' 'Nazi' 'Hitler' for seeing what we're doing!]" • (2030, ??% White) — "[Ermagerdz! White people aren't even real and there were never laws saying that they could exist in England but they're still here! Someone fucking kill them! Wtf!! Umm, they don't exist though, so don't record how many you killed, because you can't, because they're not real, but also they're Nazis, and also we have to do this because we defeated the Nazis in 1945, but also the people who defeated the Nazis are Nazis, but also hahaha just kidding, we just hate White people]"
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Dec 05 16:17:27 Harumph! Harumph! Those bloody Tories! They've opened up England to immigration! Look at Tory leader Kemi Badenoch! She was championing it! Harumph! Harumph! But also.. erm.. Badenoch is just as English as we iz innit? And also... erm... Labour loves our immigrants we do, sir, yes, sir, we do. Nothing wrong with a bit of immigration in our multi-cultural globalist society, innit? Now if you get me them wittles, and you get me them files, then we in Labour will import more Badenochs to lead Labour Party, because that's what makes an England an England! Ain't no uni-party here, sir, no sir. http://x.com/maxtempers/status/1864284002368069695
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Dec 05 16:19:05 *"then we in Labour will import more Badenochs to lead [the Tory] Party"
Cherub Cow Member	Fri Dec 06 02:03:53 ------ "Leaked documents show 700+ Home Office employee are working to "promote the recruitment, retention and progression of Muslim staff" Pretending that Diversity, Equity and Inclusion is apolitical allows activists to circumvent the civil service code" [December 5th, 2024] http://x.com/Con_Tomlinson/status/1864643442250252681 ------ The Muslim people infiltrating and replacing the Home Office using shameless nepotism are just as English as anyone. Like, what even *is* a Muslim person? It doesn't even matter, since whatever they are, they're in the Home Office now, and Protean economic units with completely indiscernible racial or ideological characteristics have been the case for the entire history of the British empire. Also, Labour wants more truck-proof bollards installed for some reason.
Seb Member	Sat Dec 07 10:26:47 CC: That's such a pile of bullshit I don't know where to begin. Home office over (43,000 employees) have 700+ people who are members of their diversity network. That doesn't mean they are "working" to do it. The network is just one of those tedious staff engagement forums by which staff - on their own time - whine about things like whether the Christmas party (staff funded before you moan) should be at a pub (exclusionary for non drinkers) or not. You fuckers really just want to make everybody else as miserable as possible to scratch your rage itch. Go and get laid or something.
Seb Member	Sat Dec 07 10:27:22 "Oh No! Muslims talk to eachother at work! The state is at threat" What's wrong with you?
Cherub Cow Member	Sat Dec 07 18:24:06 [sebfag (liar)]: "That's such a pile of bullshit I don't know where to begin." You are a liar. In this thread series, you completely lost whatever credibility you had formerly retained. This thread series should be pinned in UP for your eternal shame, with people referring back to it and studying it to see how hollow and suicidal your ideology is. You do not recognize that a people exists — especially a White people — and you do not recognize that a culture may be everlasting — unless it is one that destroys White people. You literally pretended that English people have never existed as a cohesive ethnos... despite England being founded through hereditary titles that trace to those most loyal to their founding kings (i.e., White people and their patrilineal families who were given priority as the heirs of the Kingdom all the way from their foundation until the Bolsheviks infiltrated (again) and changed laws in landmark moments such as the repeals of 1914). These errors are absolutely discrediting. In reality, DEI *explicitly* works on a formula of ethnic nepotism. DEI encourages the formation of ethnic collectives for "historically marginalized" groups (e.g., brown people, [insert minority or gender group here]-in-governance clubs/organizations within organizations) — while systematically *dis*-allowing the formation of White collectives as inherently "white supremacist". This ensures an absolute growing nepotism in ethnic groups who work as a proof of Conquest's 3rd Law, destroying organizations from within. You are anti-White. You are a genocidal maniac. You are jewish.
Seb Member	Sun Dec 08 05:30:38 CC: Blah blah blah. I recognise an English people exist, but it isn't defined strictly by hereditary and never was is my point. Or you'd have a major issue with a substantial part of the aristocracy not being English, including the monarchy. Your complete failure to understand England and English identity doesn't mean I reject the idea of an English people. Rather it means I reject *you* - a foreigner with no real connection to us, a tourist - trying to dictate to us who we are. Find your own identity. You are not of us, you do not understand us, and white skin and distant ancestry don't make up for it.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Dec 08 05:55:28 [sebfag (liar)]: "but it isn't defined strictly by hereditary and never was is my point." That is a lie. You are a liar. And I do indeed understand you, as I have thoroughly demonstrated here in the many words that you are too weak to read and therefore ignored. Your lies of "tourist" are your own projection. You are a rootless cosmopolitan. You are jewish. Again: ------ In this thread series, you completely lost whatever credibility you had formerly retained. This thread series should be pinned in UP for your eternal shame, with people referring back to it and studying it to see how hollow and suicidal your ideology is. You do not recognize that a people exists — especially a White people — and you do not recognize that a culture may be everlasting — unless it is one that destroys White people. ------
Seb Member	Sun Dec 08 06:59:23 CC: "That is a lie." That's a cold hard fact. We've been assimilating migrations since before we *were* English. Even the *name* England drives from one of several waves of Germanic migrants.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Dec 08 07:37:31 [sebfag (liar)]: "That's a cold hard fact" False. That is a lie. It is a tremendous lie. You are a liar. The very idea of hereditary title is so ubiquitous to England that it is a central trope of thousands of English stories and traditions of knights and kings, thousands of directly stated English doctrines, and was such an absolute truth that not until 1985 was it fully subverted by Bolshevik scum such as yourself. Because you are an anti-White destroyer, you falsify agnosia to pretend that there is no difference between the carefully managed allowance of genetically near "Germanic migrants" and the mass-immigration of genetically distant bomalians. You do this because you are a genocidal maniac, a liar, and an anti-West traitor. You are jewish. Again: ------ In this thread series, you completely lost whatever credibility you had formerly retained. This thread series should be pinned in UP for your eternal shame, with people referring back to it and studying it to see how hollow and suicidal your ideology is. You do not recognize that a people exists — especially a White people — and you do not recognize that a culture may be everlasting — unless it is one that destroys White people. ------
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: