/fascist/ - Surf the Kali Yuga

Fascist and Third Position Discussion

[Post a Reply]
[Hide]
Posting Mode: Reply
Säge:
Name
Subject
Message

Max message length: 5000

Files
E-mail
Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

  • Supported file types: GIF, JPG, PNG, WebM, OGG, and more
  • Max files: 5
  • Max file size: 50.00 MB
  • Read the global rules before you post, as well as the board rules found in the sticky.

08/28/20 Come and join our Matrix/IRC servers, the info can be found here.
[Index] [Catalog] [Archive] [Bottom] [Refresh]

Women and Fascism Blackshirt 03/18/2021 (Thu) 02:26:52 ID:4e73d1 No. 78
This thread is a continuation of our thread at Anon Cafe, dealing with the topic of women and fascism, or more broadly, the topic of women and pro-White politics, anti-feminism and the discussion of any notable female fascists. Old thread: https://archive.fo/h5Eje
A quote by some young women to the wind god Vayu in the Ramayana. This is a good example of the attitude of the dharma of women: >The time will never come when we will cross our father, transgress dharma and resort to svayamvara (choosing one’s own husband). Our father is our lord. He is our supreme divinity. Our husband will be the one to whom our father bestows us
What're anons thoughts on the place of women in a fascist world? I know in National Socialist Germany women were allowed to have careers, though were encouraged and expected to become mothers. The family comes first of course. Would you allow women to have jobs/careers outside the home? Do you think it's viable? Personally I think if they do, they shouldn't be in male careers. Something specific for women perhaps. Though preferably they'll dedicate their time to the family.
>>898 Long term it would be desirable for women to dedicate themselves to motherhood and care for their families, so the first task of the government would be to (1) incentivize motherhood and make it affordable for families. The Third Reich of course started to do this by giving new families large interest-free loans which were automatically deducted by 1/4th for every child had by the family. This is a great policy, and one that I would support a re-implementation of in the future. Also important is making sure that it is not necessary for the woman to work. It's worth noting that women began to enter the workforce en masse when real incomes started to stagnate in the 70s and 80s. If a man could support his family financially single-handedly, there's no reason a woman would feel compelled to work in the first place. First and foremost this kind of soft pressure is the best route to take. It doesn't involve literally forcing them too, but there would be numerous benefits for them if they did. If the feminist propaganda is turned off and feminine virtues again encouraged and not demonized, I personally believe that we would see a good change fairly rapidly (even if not overnight). The good thing about our ideals is that they are not anti-nature like that of the jew. We're not fighting an uphill battle like they are, we're merely going with the natural flow of things. For jobs and careers outside of the home, first and foremost they need to get out of the military, especially from combat roles. That is simply retarded and always will be. I think they can be decent teachers in some scenarios still, especially with younger children. There's still nothing really wrong with them working in nursing and the like either. Honestly though a lot of the jobs they hold today are so-called 'bullshit jobs' that could probably be almost eliminated under sensible government and organization. The really vital jobs in society are still essentially 100% male-occupied
(64.41 KB 632x562 feminism.jpg)
(467.01 KB 640x640 wahmyns day.png)
(320.02 KB 915x900 Ev_Kpk8VoAMYNZJ.jpg)
(186.69 KB 1024x1020 1600562139816.jpg)
>>898 >>903 This And would add >soft pressure especially this. Not every woman is cut out to be a great or even a good mother, some can't even have children, and there are many jobs that women are well suited, if not even better suited for like teaching small chilren, healthcare giving etc. Anything that deals mostly with social interactions. That said if you pay men enough that they can buy a house and feed 4 children (and remove the jewish programing), you will find the vast majority of women will be happy to return home.
(70.80 KB 500x464 aryan woman baby.jpg)
>>905 Plus if we were to resort to 'hard' pressure immediately, it would likely cause backlash. Feminist brainwashing has been going on for quite some time now, and as we all know it won't be fully undone overnight. Ideally we want to use as little force as possible, especially in delicate social issues such as this. Of course though, I think as time passes it's becoming clearer and clearer to those watching the behavior of lemmings carefully that you can do almost anything to them without them lashing back too hard (talking in regards to the virus hoax), so to some extent we will get what needs to be done done. And I definitely agree that the vast majority of women would be happy to return home. Statistics even indicate that women have been unhappier since the 1960s, to no one's surprise in our circles. If a woman is not busy with children, there's nothing wrong with her doing some sort of work that's suited to her like you said, especially older women with adult children and the like. The home, needless to say, should be her first priority though.
>>903 >interest-free loans It's important to note that Hitler pretty much hacked the jew-engineered economy. At this moment in time, where most nations have an external debt higher than 80% of their GDP, it should be assumed that any /fascist/ government would completely break away from the global financial market and start over entirely economy-wise. When all you've got to work with is a more or less ruined nation, the primary industries, and an authoritarian, nationalist government, how would you provide new couples this incentive to have children? It's important to start designing these sort of flexible policies ahead of time, as they can be applied even if you don't have total control over an entire nation.
(378.29 KB 1080x1350 pregnant white woman.jpg)
>>941 >When all you've got to work with is a more or less ruined nation, the primary industries, and an authoritarian, nationalist government, how would you provide new couples this incentive to have children? For a period it might not be an immediate focus. Ideas for the future should be ready ahead of time much like you say, but in general it will be difficult to persuade people to have children at a greater rate when the nation is a complete wreck. Also, so long as the problems of non-White invaders is not definitively solved, the issue of getting up birthrates is almost in vain. Removing them will not be done overnight either, as there are literally tens of millions of them in America, and many thousands if not millions in European countries as well depending on where one lives. But once things have become more stable and well-functioning, there will be every opportunity to immediately put many good policies in practice.
>>903 Interesting note about the interest-free loan policy is that apparently the woman was required as part of the stipulations of the loan to give up her job by the time of her wedding and undertake not to rejoin the labor market again before the time the loan was paid off. Also the loan was not issued in cash, but in vouchers for furniture and household equipment. Very, very good policy.
(532.69 KB Hawaii-Bill.pdf)
New Hawaii amendement over "domestic abuse"
Woman should not be political spokespeople, but should be good faces for the movement.
>>1466 In principle I have to agree, but I also can’t help but realize the effect that Isabel Peralta had when she made her little speech. Seeing a young woman exposing the jew caused waves in the media and online. Part of the reason for this is because our society is so gynocentric. Anything a woman does will garner infinitely more attention than anything a man does, unfortunately. The question is how to approach this then. I think Isabel did more good than bad, certainly, but to center our movements around women just to get attention is obviously a disaster waiting to happen.
(132.93 KB 737x737 1567781835032.jpg)
(419.03 KB 1065x810 1574136008933.jpg)
(250.23 KB 805x757 1576022075140.jpg)
(100.04 KB 960x952 1600837716848.jpg)
"Who cares if women are attracted to our cause? If our cause is popular and successful, women will flock to it because it is popular and successful; if it isn't, they won't be seen having anything to do with it. Either way, they don't matter, only the men we attract to our cause do."
(255.76 KB 1440x1301 1592172963548.png)
(609.27 KB 1808x3731 1564934070028.png)
(148.34 KB 744x1024 1564933524628.jpg)
(514.50 KB 1344x3216 1578007178873.png)
(215.24 KB 960x572 1568769800238.jpg)
(250.63 KB 912x300 1568769818538.jpg)
(151.34 KB 1080x1350 1567442177494.jpg)
(1.02 MB 908x778 1572641058451.png)
>>6549 Women only support political/social causes for three reasons: >1 it is popular and socially acceptable; women are extremely conformist and groupminded and want to be as mainstream as possible >2 they can use it to virtue signal to their friends (most of whom they actually hate, because women can't stand other women) and earn brownie points for being a good girl; mostly ties into motivation 1, making them seem popular and mainstream so their 'friends' don't attack them for not being popular and mainstream >3 it fills the void of their biological purpose; women consume wine, have eight cats, donate to some charity buying schoolbooks for niggers in Ghana, and demand more third-world shitskins be imported for them to care for with charity work so they can virtue signal and find something, anything, to fill the hole in their lives left by not having children and a husband; women with no kids literally go insane and desperately try to find something to fill the void with, something to fulfill their maternal instinct before their biological clock runs out and their egg carton is empty Jews have successfully hijacked all three of these. Our responsibility is take them back. >1 we must convince women that our cause is popular and will succeed; women don't compete in the race, they wait at the finish line and flock to the winners. Convince them that we're on the winning side, and they'll start defecting to us. >2 hijack their need to virtue signal; make everything about their children and family. "My children are more important than any refugee!" Give them something to preen over and make other women intensely jealous; see how they seethe in jealous rage over a woman who bothers to look good for her husband, has a clean house, puts effort into pleasing her man, and finds wholesome outlets for her creative urges and need to stave off boredom? Women don't climb the mountain to reach the top, they get pissed that there is a top, declare wherever they happen to be to be the new mountaintop, and spew hatred at the women who climbed higher than they did. Convince them that they can make all their 'friends' jealous of them by behaving a certain way and that it will give them an opportunity to show off, and they'll suddenly discover that they were 'trad' all along. >3 Put a fucking baby in them as early and as often as possible and keep them at home. They'll genuinely be happier that way, and will be too busy raising children to get involved in feminist nonsense. Yes, you can afford to have multiple children and a stay-at-home wife on a single income. Get a real job in a trade and work your ass off, it's worth the sacrifice; don't buy the latest gadgets, don't live in the trendy, expensive part of town, and don't try to keep up with the Jones's. Buy a used car and drive it until it dies. You only need one television, and you honestly don't even need that since everything on tv these days is trash. Buy a cheap phone and hold onto it until it dies; fuck the latest iPhone. You don't need to go on trips every summer. Your family and posterity are the most valuable things you can possess; that's what you should be investing all your time and income into. Do this, and more and more women will join our cause over time. The more women see women on your side, the more they will want to flock to it. It's like dating: if you're single, no woman will want you and they'll treat you like a pariah. If you're wearing a wedding ring, or at least seem popular with girls, women will all want you, because some other woman wants you and you must therefore be worth something. They're stupid conformists; use that to your advantage.
(77.43 KB 820x476 1569610536593.jpg)
(38.39 KB 503x644 1574321185714.jpg)
(86.56 KB 1024x984 1574322044937.jpg)
(141.15 KB 899x687 1590850827049.jpg)
(100.69 KB 719x493 1592536846057.jpg)
>>6554 Women don't compete in races, they wait at the finish line and fuck the winners.
(124.98 KB 1024x878 1599068515104.jpg)
(134.41 KB 1024x698 1601345048432.jpg)
(299.94 KB 1283x1275 1606398804266.png)
(96.12 KB 1280x544 1606398626398.png)
>>6555 So be a winner. Quit being an incel loser and become a winner. Go to the gym and work out. Go camping. Learn how to work on your car and household appliances. Own tools and know how to use them. Get a real job instead of flipping burgers or being an Amazon warehouse slave. Make yourself attractive, and women will follow. Don't act desperate and go for the first one that shows interest; women can sniff out desperation and nothing makes their cunts dry up faster than a desperate man. Be selective and pick the right one; she is, after all, the vessel in which you will create your children. You want a good one, not the first one that comes along. Make it clear that you have standards and she needs to live up to them, or you'll find one that will; a woman who might consider ditching you for a 'better' man would rather stay with you if you make it clear you're willing to ditch her for a 'better' woman. She'll subconsciously be afraid that she doesn't measure up and therefore can't find a 'better' man than what she currently has, and will therefore struggle to meet your standards so you don't ditch her for a younger, more compliant, model.
(88.46 KB 1000x1000 34.jpg)
>>6555 Lool look at those numbers, but even if they're as accurate as purported all most of us men have to do is suck it up and game the odds. Which means just rolling dice. Annoying. And evidently that's all what we have to do today swipe yes and go schmooze over text. And I don't mean to be disparaging but that's literally how it is my dudes. Doesn't help that jews are trying to fuck us over in any way possible including the trend and dating shit. It's all intentional but the solution for near everyone based on the data is literally a numbers game where we just roll the dice. Really though it's been that for a long time already. Now if you don't want to do any of that shit go get a nice hooker, aka escort and purchase some just to take the edge off. before some of you fags might go off saying degenerate, degenerate is having to be in a relationship with stuck up bitch who eventually wants you to beg for pussy just because you don't play "her way" and let her "tame" you and so on, that's fucking degenerate. fuck.
(448.04 KB 1333x1000 1559497266726.jpg)
(106.88 KB 1125x882 1567642964956.jpg)
(104.88 KB 1024x848 1570173382504.jpg)
(54.10 KB 540x293 1602152155392.jpg)
(58.12 KB 377x750 1611676983677.jpg)
(355.37 KB 480x480 1544506210938.png)
(133.54 KB 788x1000 1526960121544.jpg)
(365.02 KB 1280x1098 1467176485939.jpg)
(787.81 KB 1139x1500 1561362042282.jpg)
(148.87 KB 1359x960 1535320917797.jpg)
>>6558 >>6557 You're a failure because you've chosen to fail.
(375.23 KB 918x944 concern.png)
>>6559 That's such a ridiculous reply, what does it have to do with accepting the fact that we have to be playing the numbers game on tinder/with women in general as a men to succeed you gay turbonigger? It's the truth. And It's the same thing in nature as well. It's not a special phenomenon at all.
>>6557 >relationship with stuck up bitch who eventually wants you to beg for pussy just because you don't play "her way" That's just failure on your part
>>6666 If you were in my shoes you would have just accepted it and gone full gyno mode. which would mean wasting your life on some overly controlling crazy and be that guy who eventually has their woman boss them around about everything trying to micromanage you like if you were some fucking rts unit, because that's what it is. I'm not interested in that though.
Women side with the winners. Who among us would claim a prize before winning the race?
>>6686 >Women side with the winners. More so with the herd. Women hate the idea of not being socially-accepted and will usually align their opinions with that of the herd and whatever the Jews tell them to think. The only cure for this is a man that she is infatuated with enough so that it overrides the programming and herd morality.
(84.41 KB 836x1024 1608978529745.jpg)
>>6697 This could work on an individual level. The final solution to the Woman Question is to win the war, oust our enemies and dictate new social rules they will adhere to.
>>6701 Yeah what I said really isn't even a solution, it's just a byproduct of how women work at the individual level. Ultimately, like you said, it comes down to who controls the state and the important centers of power. Feminism will fall quickly, as it is anti-Nature.
(62.17 KB 1008x1008 1603730234284.jpg)
>>6733 Go ahead, I will give it a watch.
(98.44 KB 1000x644 girls fascist.jpg)
>>6733 This could be a very good documentary. I will watch.
>>6733 Sounds incredibly based anon.
>>7026 Powerful video, anon. Thank you. What is happening in our societies is a tragedy. The footage of those tiny fetuses moving around was heartbreaking too, and I have newfound disgust for those who support abortion. I imagine some will get triggered over the redpills you drop on young marriages, but the truth needs to be spread. I will be sure to spread the link a bit. Great artwork throughout too. Upload some to the aesthetics thread when you have time sometime.
/pol/ jannies couldn't handle it, it seems
(586.54 KB 980x742 Soyjack.png)
(252.43 KB 785x1000 soyjack jew.jpg)
(593.22 KB 1319x841 national socialist gigachad.png)
(97.72 KB 612x612 Eunice & Charlie Johns.jpg)
>>7033 >White families making lots of White children >having teen pregnancies means more White babies = more Whites and higher birthrates <IM GETTING FLASHBACKS TO NAZI GERMANY THEY WANTED TO BREED ARYANS ITS LIKE A HOLOCAUST IM 65 YEARS OLD AND I SURVIVED BEING GASSED 20 TIMES ITS ANUDDA SHOAH WHITES MUST NOT PROCREATE
>>7026 Is it considered "attraction" if you see a good lookin teen and think she's good looking? Just thinking only. By teen I mean 16-18 years old. Another question is whether the abovementioned situation makes one a pedo. This shit's been mind boggling.
>>7035 >Is it considered "attraction" if you see a good lookin teen and think she's good looking? It depends. Attraction can mean thinking somebody is pretty/beautiful and can also mean having a crush/continued romantic interest in a woman. Either way there is nothing wrong at all with being attracted to teen girls who are sexually mature and developed. In the UK, they raised the age of marriage from 16 to 18 years old meaning that the demographic you just mentioned cannot marry young. At the same time, they blast young people and teens with hardcore degenerate porn and LGBT tranny shit, so that they fuck different people, losing their ability to pair bond, instead of marrying young and being in a monogamous life long relationship. I recommend this video >>7026 I'm just about 2/3 the way through.
(154.40 KB 918x531 feminist society.png)
>>7034 That's perfectly normal and not pedophilic in the slightest. Only insane feminists will make say otherwise. Being a pedo is when you're attracted to completely flat-chested, hairless girls still in elementary school or middle school
>>7038 That's what I've liked about his documentaries that I have seen so far (just this one and the Tarrant one). He lays out the case, and then nicely ties it together, and forcefully too, at the end of it, leaving no doubts as what is to be done. Just as he said that war must be brought to the invaders in the documentary on Tarrant, he is right again here. The issue of feminism and gender relations must be taken very seriously. It is one of the most important.
>>7038 >Bookchad >Make arguments for marrying 7,9, and 11 year olds Eunice & Charlie Johns.jpg related
>>7040 Are you trying to imply that that picture shows anything bad?
>>7041 >.t pedo >>7037 >Being a pedo is when you're attracted to completely flat-chested, hairless girls still in elementary school or middle school >NINE years old
>>7043 >had a monogamous marriage with his nine-year wife that lasted until his death and fathered many children Sounds wholesome
>>7044 And perhaps it was, but anyone today, arguing for normalizing sexual relations with PRE-pubescent children is by definition a fucking pedophile and gets the fucking rope
>>7045 So why is it different now? He can have a relationship such as this and have it be called 'wholesome' but anyone who argues for a return to anything like this today deserves death? That's completely irrational. The goal here is to fix women and bring back healthy male-female relationships, and girls getting married a bit younger (as well as males too) is an important part of this. I don't know if I'd be having nine year old girls married off regularly in my perfect society, but I might have them get engaged and wait a few years.
>>7046 >and girls getting married a bit younger (as well as males too) This, with boys who are within a 4 year age range " at the most 14 and 18, 12 and 16, ect". I don't think any of us want men marrying girls who are young enough to be their own daughters. Historically marriages of prepubescent people were still rare, even if they weren't illegal. And girls were married off at around 14 years.
>>7046 >He can have a relationship such as this and have it be called 'wholesome' Your words not mine, given just the stated facts I would not make that claim, as Charlie John's was 'go to housekeeping' a 9-10 year old 'Perhaps' he waited a few years to consummate the marriage or 'Perhaps' he was a pedophile and diddled his daughters when the wife got 'too old'. So yeah, MAYBE it was a healthy relationship or maybe it was an abusive relationship Also we are not talking about some one off isolated case, but the normalization of pedophilic behaviors and urges In the docu, Bookpedo tries to make justification for marrying 7, 9 and 11 year olds. >So why is it different now? Because children today do not live the lives they did 100 or 200 years ago, and are a hell of a lot more immature than they were then. >The goal here is to fix women and bring back healthy male-female relationships, and girls getting married a bit younger (as well as males too) is an important part of this. You fix the disease, NOT the symptom. Get rid of kikery, tiktok thots, broken families, neglected children, weak men, spoiled women. None of these issues are solved by normalizing marriage 7-11 year old girls >I don't know if I'd be having nine year old girls married off regularly in my perfect society Then why the fuck are you defending the position? I you want to argue from 16 year old marriages and maybe in some cases 14 (given that husband is less than 18) then maybe you would get some traction. But when your arguing for the marriage of pre-pubesent children to adult men, you are not going to get much agreement, except from actual diddlers.
>>7051 The disease is of course feminism, and part of feminism has been the raising of the age of consent to levels that were historically high. Eradicating feminism from our societies would consist largely of several things: <removal of women from the workplace <limitation of higher education for women <promotion of natalism and motherhood <banning abortion and birth-control <giving the male guardian more leeway in dealing with female dependents <making divorce more difficult <marrying women off younger etc. Now let's see what effects these measures would have. The execution of this entire program of course presumes that kikery has been gotten rid of. TikTok thottery would be shamed by the family and general population and would be removed by the platforms almost certainly. Broken families would be solved by early marriages between men and women of roughly similar age, facilitating pair-bonding and stable marriages. I support girls being married around ages 13-15 under the vast majority of circumstances. Married to her husband and her new family supported by the state, she would be easily able to prepare for motherhood and provide for her future children well, of course supported by the income of her husband as well. Child neglect would go down massively. Weak men is a separate question that would be too much of diversion to deal with here, but it must be dealt with. For 'spoiled women', this will be in part dealt with by the fact that she will have actual domestic duties and standards to abide by. The women serves her family, not the husband his wife as a slave. >Then why the fuck are you defending the position? Merely because it seemed to be a successful marriage. There is a difference between this and saying that this should be the norm though. I don't know the exact circumstances on how that one came to be. Even in fucking Afghanistan of all places the most common age of marriage is 15 or 16. And sure one can find examples of younger marriages in places like that, but I don't think there is too benefit to be gained from making that the norm, as well to mention that it outside of my sensibilities and presumably the vast majority of society
.>>6555 Women are the jews of sex. Once the trannies develop artificial man-wombs, we should grow them on rats and avoid women altogether. Meanwhile, cover them up like sandniggers. They got that one right. >b-but muh female beauty! Go watch porn you simpoid
>>7062 Calm down Anglin
>>7059 >If you don't support fucking children, you're a jew Nice argument, Bookpedo. Thoroughly convincing.
>>7062 I don't think women are that big of a problem honestly. Shitty conditions create shitty people. We live in a society that is directly designed to disrupt the natural harmony between members of both sexes, which are naturally complementary and hierarchical at the same time. What we are forced to deal with now is a form of Cultural Marxism that aims to 'liberate' the woman from her natural position and to make out her husband / male family as 'oppressors'. Familial servitude to husband and children is replaced with service to corporations. This is the true reason women were 'liberated', as well as to destroy the fundamental building block of society, i.e. the family. Having them under the guardianship of their fathers, husbands and sons would lead to safer women, more well-behaved women and happier women. No one loses in this situation. We must look at the examples of Aryan civilizations in the past for guidance. >Meanwhile, cover them up like sandniggers. They got that one right. This used to be done all over the Greek world as well. I'm not sure what I think about it. Women wearing things like pants and tight-fitting clothes is certainly degenerate though. It's a form of sexual harassment towards men too, and you're cucked if you let your wife dress like that in public. In private it's fine if it's for her husband, but otherwise it's as degenerate as crossdressing men are, we've just been conditioned not to see it that way.
Anyone else noticed the incelization of right? I've noticed that many guys don't gfs or wives. You'll see White dudes do stuff like shit on White women and even so far as to have contempt for them as if all the world's problems are their fault. Many other things like this. I can't be the ony one
(216.00 KB 647x809 divide_et_impera.jpg)
>>7173 Yeah, it's quintessential divide and conquer by they jews. They've been developing feminism for centuries.
>>7174 What really concerns me is the fact that many higher profile dudes, don't have wives or girlfriends. Because I know that Tarrant was never mentioned to have had one.
>>7173 It's definitely a noticeable trend, but not one that really surprises me. First, obviously, feminism has led to sexual promiscuity and a culture where women chase after a small minority of males. The value of women is also tremendously overinflated to the fact that men give exorbitant amounts of money to even ugly or fat women to see their tits, or just to watch them play a video game or something. All of this has led to a massive amount of virgin men, many of who are also badly socialized due to the Internet, video games and other similar things. Jews have created such a situation where the natural balance between the two genders has been completely thrown out of whack. The problem is though like you said, some people just start hating all women. There are certainly certain types of women that I find highly distasteful that are products of the current society, but I think the situation we're in has been purposely engineered to an extent, this sort of madness doesn't exist in a healthy society. They have certain natural behaviors, but they're controlled, and therefore benign. I can't bring myself to just hate them all. People who do should be told to fuck off. Unfortunately I kind of fall into the incel class. I'm in my early twenties and I've never had a girlfriend or anything. There are some reasons why that are quite fixable that I will be trying to change in the near future though (no job, etc)
>>7175 Look, if instead of embarking in his crusade Tarrant would have just met a roastie, shot his seed inside of her and made a couple of children, sure as hell he would have not had the time, focus and resources to do anything else beyond providing for the brats and the roastie. Family men do not take revolutionary paths.
>>7177 To supplement your post:
>>7176 I had this mentality when I was younger, but as I got older, and began talking with girls instead of hating on them, I realized that a lot of women are kind. Kind girls are the girls that don't wear tight clothes all the time. Kind girls are Aryan girls, mostly yellow-whitish hair, blue eyes and skinny. I now realize these girls are beautiful and great people to talk to. They listen to what you have to say. Nature is beautiful. Aryans are beautiful. I regret doing what I did in my younger years. Some women are truly magnificent.
(310.64 KB 1500x1226 arno breker man and woman 2.jpg)
>>7213 Good post, anon. I try not to be resentful about where I have landed myself at the moment. All women are certainly not irredeemable 'whores'. At the deepest level I think that men need women, and women need men. Part of the reason why everything is so dysfunctional today is because this has been ignored or purposely attacked. The complementary understanding of the two genders is the way to go from my observations of people in my own life and from reading I have done.
>>7215 Exactly. Observe for yourself and choose reality from what you have seen. For the last year I have talked to more women than I had done my entire life before that. From what I have observed, some women are worth dying for. Before these realizations I never thought that I would feel real love towards a woman, and here I am having met the most kind, most beautiful Aryan girl. It feels like a beautiful woman makes life worth living. I have much more energy now, than i had before.
>>7216 Better get her pregnant fast.
(97.01 KB 1024x685 women flower field.jpg)
>>7216 It sounds like you have met a really good woman, anon. I am happy for you. Also this haha: >>7217
>>7217 Sure as hell will! >>7218 All of us will find our chosen one sometime. Women will favor National Socialists. We are real gentlemen.
A good article from Thuletide on birth control: https://thuletide.wordpress.com/2021/06/19/chemical-birth-control-is-destroying-womens-bodies-and-the-environment-lots-of-studies/ >>7219 >Sure as hell will! Awesome! Good luck anon
(172.82 KB 1280x1280 1624824665817.jpg)
>>7213 Best of luck, anon. Good to hear! The kikes have gone to great lengths to destroy White women, this is proof they hate them just as much as they hate White males.
>>7062 what a jewish post
>>7696 It's probably a rabid tranny. They hate women because they will never be one.
>>7696 Sad to see so many men fall for the Jewish D&C scheme between men and women. Women have their natural ways, and when they are not encouraged to live harmoniously with men, what we see today is the result.
>>7702 I blame the incompetent fathers who bring children into the world and refuse to give up any of their own time to proper parenting, and instead let pop culture and social media babysit their daughters and poz their minds.
>>7708 Yeah, while it's bad for young boys to be raised by public school, entertainment and the internet, it's far worse for a young girl to be raised and exposed to that sort of stuff from birth. I don't have any kids yet, but it's sad that I would almost fear having a daughter due to the state of the culture. Which is very sad, because I would love to have a daughter in any other circumstances. I think it would be hard to find a good balance between sealing them away from the world forever and letting the jews pour poison into their minds.
>>6560 >tinder And you've once again proven you've chosen to fail. All you'll find on tinder is used up whores, so why would you waste your time there?
>>7037 Unlike faggotry, there's an evolutionary advantage to being a pedo/hebe. From the time we were stone age hunter-gatherers to the medieval era, men in their 20's and 30's were marrying girls in their early teens or prepubescent. This held advantages and disadvantages. Men who found mates who were older had to get the consent of the woman herself to breed her, had to woo a prospective mate, etc. Acquiring a mate was expensive and time consuming, but once he had secured her he could reproduce almost immediately. Men who obtained child brides, on the other hand, had different pros and cons. Once could get a prepubescent girl relatively cheap; usually an attractive teen girl had a high price demanded by her parents, but a younger girl would be cheaper. Get her young enough, and her consent isn't a factor: her parents marry her off to you. You then have a guaranteed virgin you can raise yourself and mold into the perfect wife. The disadvantage being that this strategy requires more long-term investment as you must first raise your bride, waiting until she is old enough to impregnate, and then raise your children. So being attracted to prepubescent or pubescent girls could be an evolutionary advantage. Virgin brides are ideal; the more men a woman has sex with prior to marriage, the more she wrecks her ability to pair-bond with her husband. This even happens when the only man they've slept with is the same man they married; sex before marriage = higher divorce rate, regardless of who it is they have sex with. Acquiring a young bride allows you to secure a guaranteed virgin, meaning a more stable marriage and you can be sure any children she has are yours, and you can raise and mold her to be an obedient, ideal wife. Of course, this only works in a society where you're married for life. Pedos who just want to fuck children to get off, rather than marry one and have children with her, are degenerates who must be eliminated as dysgenic, same as faggots and trannies.
>>7708 Well, what you described is literally how generations have been raised from boomers onwards. Today situation is totally out of control. The few Whites that breed are usually awful parents, but even the ones that might be good at it will see their efforts destroyed by globohomo media+school brainwashing.
>>8932 Can't find much to disagree with here. Once girls hit anywhere between the ages of 12 or 14 today, they are completely ruined by the culture. Before that they still have some positive feminine qualities. There are some exceptions, but they prove the rule. That's the real blackpill about today, is that a young wife has become more important than ever, but a man will never be able to get one.
>>8932 I don't think it's too controversial that men are attracted to women when they are hitting the stride of puberty, as your chart indicates.
(812.67 KB 693x648 ClipboardImage.png)
>>8963 >I don't think it's too controversial that men are attracted to women when they are hitting the stride of puberty Depends who you ask. In terminally pozzed countries like America if you even are looking to get with an 18 year old as a man in his mid to late twenties you'd be judged as borderline pedo-tier, not to mention girls labeled as underage according to the law but undergoing puberty according to nature. <you'll date the used goods and you'll be happy
(1.27 MB 530x1100 1568198583837.gif)
(352.68 KB 649x960 1595445514884.png)
(609.27 KB 1808x3731 1582481276226.png)
(255.76 KB 1440x1301 1592172963548.png)
>>8932 Again, it must be stressed that simply allowing men to have sex with children is dysgenic and degenerate. The Jews and their feminists cat's paws pushed to raise the age of consent in order to fuck birthrates and stable marriages; now you see so many of them pushing to do away with age of consent so that faggots can molest kids and turn them into faggots too. Doing away with the age of consent and marrying off young girls to older, financially-established men as we did in the past is a necessary step to restore our birthrates, but this must be done simultaneously with enacting a ban on no-fault divorce, ending automatic child custody for mothers, alimony, child support, etc. Make marriage a lifetime commitment, and remove the incentives for divorce in the first place. Any man who decides to ask a co-worker or friend for his daughter's hand in marriage better be ready to support her for the rest of his life. He's not only investing in her as he raises her to be the perfect, obedient, feminine wife and impregnates her when she comes of age, he's committed to her until one or the other is dead. She, likewise, must be equally as committed to her husband and psuedo-father figure. To regain the glory of the past, we must return to the practices of the past.
>>9357 >age of consent is now defined as menarch for girls >age of marriage has no lower limit >girls under 21 require parental permission to marry >legalize arranged marriages; girls under 21 can't NOT marry if their parents arrange it >return to standards similar to those of the Roman Empire: a man must be in his 20's or 30's, have finished his education, and either have completed a term of military service or be financially established enough to afford a house and a family in order to be considered marriagable; girls are either married off in their teens so the man can start making babies right away, or married off while prepubescent so the man can raise her to be the perfect wife, waiting until she's old enough to impregnate to consummate the marriage >school for girls focuses on balancing a household budget, cooking, cleaning, child-rearing, first aid, etc., with just enough advanced science, literature, history, etc. that she can hold a decent conversation with her husband and understand what he's talking about >only White men, age 21, who own land, own a business, or have served in the military, can vote and run for public office; women are forbidden to vote or hold any public office, elected or appointed >interest-free newlywed loans so men can buy a house, car, furniture, etc. No payments for first five years of marriage (if wife has reached puberty, otherwise starts when wife reaches menarch), 25% of the loan is forgiven for each child born during that 5 year period, so if they have 4 children they don't have to pay back any of the loan >incentivize birthrates; give out medals to mothers with 4 or more children that give them special privileges like better parking spaces, skip to the front of the line at the grocery store, etc. Have communities nominate candidates for an annual Good Mother award, with a medal and more privileges as the prize; women love shiny shit and being able to lord privileges over others, they'll compete to pop out babies and win fabulous prizes >no-fault divorce, alimony, child support, etc. banned; can only get a divorce in the event of a cheating spouse or physical abuse, and must have evidence that will hold up in court >sex outside of marriage punishable by a fine, and required to marry the one you fucked; cheating on a spouse punishable by flogging and jail time for first offense, death for second offense; rape is punishable by death, as is homosexuality >married women cannot work outside the homestead unless their husband is disabled and unable to support the family on his income alone; this will halve the labor pool, ensuring wages rise enough that a man can support a family on a single income again, and women aren't focusing on careers instead of making babies >financial incentives for people deemed to have desirable genes, giving tax breaks and paying a bounty for each child they have There, I just fixed the birthrates.
>>9358 Your first two lines are redundant, age of consent is age of consent to marry.
>>9360 Under his proposed laws here you could marry a girl much younger, it seems, but not necessarily have sex with her legally until she reaches the proper age. I can't see much to dispute her personally, I would just wonder about whether such a thing would even be enforceable in practice. He's basically proposing the practice of wife husbandry, which, given the way male-female relations have become today, is not all that insane. >>9357 >>9358 >sex outside of marriage punishable by a fine, and required to marry the one you fucked; cheating on a spouse punishable by flogging and jail time for first offense, death for second offense; rape is punishable by death, as is homosexuality Based. I can't disagree with any of these really. What I would mention is tweaking laws on so-called 'domestic violence'. What this ought to be called is domestic discipline. Sometimes a wife might need disciplined by her husband when she is being irrational or misbehaving. The husband has every right to restore familial harmony in such situations. I'm not saying beat her bloody or anything, but anything that will get her to snap out of her bad state of mind. Anti-domestic discipline laws have been put in place to undermine the authority of the husband and father within the family. Also, I would redefine the legal category of woman to be always require a dependent of some sort, much like children. For example, have them either dependent on their fathers, husbands or sons, depending on who is available. And if no one at all (which should be almost impossible under your proposed model), the state. This all would probably fix 99% of problems.
(70.94 KB 503x368 1599840438911.jpg)
(73.47 KB 850x400 1606398609422.jpg)
(96.12 KB 1280x544 1606398626398.png)
(272.92 KB 963x591 1606399248143.jpg)
>>9368 Agreed; spanking or a good slap to the face should be legal when necessary to keep your wife in line. Women are little more than overgrown children and should be treated that way. Ditto for women being dependents of others. And under no circumstances should single mothers be allowed.
>>9369 I can't remember exactly where I read it, but in the past I was scouring websites by conservative Christians who have implemented some of this into their lives, and there were many testimonies even from wives saying how much it had improved the quality of their marriage. Like what Schopenhauer and Luther are saying here, a woman is fundamentally of a childlike mindset. I know, looking back at my childhood, that there were absolutely times when I was acting like a complete retard and deserved a spanking from my parents. That is why countries who try to ban this as child abuse are insane (and it is another way to undermine the family). In the same way, there are many examples of even grown women just acting like total toddlers, throwing tantrums and just acting like a bitch. There is only one solution, for the good of the family and for her own good too.
>>9370 Imagine how much we could unfuck society just by implementing domestic discipline and wife husbandry today.
(387.39 KB 998x924 1534119532841.jpg)
(151.34 KB 1080x1350 1567442177494.jpg)
(1.02 MB 908x778 1588516150823.png)
>>9374 The thing is, women were genuinely happier back then too. When women got smacked for stepping out of line, stayed at home cooking, cleaning, and raising children, had 4+ kids, and a husband who provided for them, they were happy and fulfilled. Today, with all the "empowerment" they could ever ask for, women have careers instead of families, pets instead of children, get to ride the cock carousel without consequence until they hit the wall, have affirmative action and special legal privileges, and more... and yet they're universally miserable and damaged, and mental illness and depression are more common in women than not. It's almost as if women were biologically evolved to be wards of their fathers and husbands and to be happiest staying within their domain and having babies, and our attempts to 'liberate' them from this are nothing more than self-destructive hubris at best and deliberate wrecking of the family and civilization at worst.
(106.47 KB 272x320 Untitled.png)
>>9369 >>9370 >>9374 >>9376 Is it bad that I find the idea of spanking and disciplining women to be sexually arousing?
>>9374 I think if we come back to power in the future that it is almost inevitable. Wife husbandry is a great idea, but people will have to be thoroughly de-liberalized and de-Abrahamized in order for that to be seen as a good solution to many of the problems that we face. I think it is a fantastic idea, as if a girl is raised to love her husband and to behave like a good little wife, she will be a perfect wife when she is older. I am not sure how long it would take for the brainwashing to wear off though. And like you said, today women are more miserable than ever, and feminism will rapidly collapse without ZOG enforcing it through institutions. In Afghanistan right now the birthrates are probably soaring right now as the Taliban reassumes control, shuts down the school, takes away the birth control and gets rid of (((family planning))) and other practices designed to subvert their women. >>9386 Not trying to coompost here or anything since I unironically thing that it would have positive effects on family life, but I'm not going to pretend that it isn't hot to imagine. Tfw no wife to spank until her butt is red
(226.12 KB 607x764 1534116915764.jpg)
(2.79 MB 640x360 1595449916809.webm)
(3.93 MB 650x364 arranged marriages.webm)
(538.42 KB 640x636 1544577328951.png)
>>9389 >people will have to be thoroughly de-liberalized Agreed, but if we're seizing control anyway, wouldn't we simply implement it into law? The natural aristocracy would lead by example, and we could do as the Jews do and use media and entertainment to normalize ideas to the masses. >an American version of Bunny Drop, where a man just out of college can't find a decent girlfriend who isn't a whore/shrew, so his parents arrange for him to marry the daughter of a family friend... who is 7. Follows his misadventures in a realistic way as he has to man up and be responsible for his little wife, learning how to take care of her, disciplining and raising her properly, discovering all the headaches of caring for a child, and both of them developing an emotional bond that blossoms into genuine love, resulting in a physical relationship once she's physically mature enough; follows her through her teen years as she goes through all the same things he did when he first married her, learning how to raise children, while he is now an experienced veteran able to guide her as a parent since he raised her >a Little House on the Prairie style domestic drama about a man homesteading with his 14 year old wife, and their adventures and struggles in learning to farm and raise a family >multiple "normal" tv shows that just so happen to feature a recurring character married to a girl in her teens, or engaging in wife husbandry; prominently feature one who's married a 10 year old who is thoroughly disgusted by a blatant pedophile who can't shut up about how lucky he is to be married to a 10 year old and wishes he could find someone willing to give their daughter to him >"New study shows that the most stable marriages have a virgin bride between the ages of 12 and 18! New study shows the optimum time to start having children is 14 to 16! New study shows women who have 5 children are the happiest! New study shows-" >de-Abrahamized You do realize wife husbandry and teen marriage was the norm for the last 2,000 years that Europe has been Christian, right? And that the Bible actively encourages it, with Mary being 12 when she was married to Joseph and pregnant with Jesus, most of the brides mentioned in the Bible being tweens or teens, and God explicitly telling the Israelites that they should take war brides who are children or girls young enough to be guaranteed virgins? Not only is none of this incompatible with Christianity, it's been a part of Christianity from the beginning. It's only today, with Jews liberalizing society, pushing feminism, and weakening and subverting the churches they infiltrate, that it's a problem. >>9386 >not spanking your wife for being disobedient and contrary, then having hot make-up sex and cuddling afterward Why live? As >>9370 said, you can find Christian fundamentalist groups who implement domestic discipline, and even when the wives are against it at first, they all gradually came to accept it and even like it, saying it improved their marriage and made them happier to be firmly put in their place by their husband. These Christian organizations promoting domestic discipline even make a point of saying to marry young and start disciplining her when she's young so you can mold her into a proper wife. Clearly our ancestors knew better than we do and there's a reason they did things a certain way for all of recorded history.
(45.38 KB 454x720 hitler hugs his waifu.jpg)
>>9401 >Agreed, but if we're seizing control anyway, wouldn't we simply implement it into law? The natural aristocracy would lead by example, and we could do as the Jews do and use media and entertainment to normalize ideas to the masses. That's a fair point. If the lemmings can be led to celebrate degenerate acts such as sodomy, transgenderism and rampant hedonism, getting them to accept laws which effectively abolish feminism and everything promoting it will be quite easy for the reason that it is an anti-natural ideology. Jews work against the grain of human nature in subverting our nations. It is an uphill battle. What we are proposing here is fully in accord with human nature. In merely a generation or two after the parasite is removed women would be completely fixed. They would get married young, they would care for their husbands and family, they would attend schools to teach them how to care for their children, how to attend to various domestic tasks such as cleaning, sewing, gardening, cooking, basic craftwork (in order to lessen people's dependence on big clothing chains and the like), etc. These are all vital tasks for any woman to know, and a family without this knowledge suffers. >an American version of Bunny Drop Giga based. >You do realize wife husbandry and teen marriage was the norm for the last 2,000 years that Europe has been Christian, right? I guess I more specifically mean a certain variety of post-Christian moralism that has infected our society, linked with Puritans and feminists (the ones who raised the ages for marriage up to current levels in the first place). Due to their efforts it has essentially reached the point where even expressing the desire to date down in age (e.g. a 25 year old dating an 18 year old) would be seen as 'creepy' in the eyes of many, not to mention what has been talked about in this thread which are even lower ages. This mindset is very harmful for our people, needless to say.
(172.52 KB 1024x1024 1600255083877.jpg)
(305.68 KB 480x624 1569702136445.png)
(68.30 KB 1024x639 1582334821593.jpg)
(1.12 MB 1632x1724 1592315478195.png)
(727.05 KB 992x1061 1596986150668.jpg)
>>9403 Weimar Germany went from one of the most degenerate hellscapes that Jews still wax nostalgic for, to Nazi Germany. And we're getting closer ourselves. Germans under Weimar had to deal with crippling debt, worthless money, child prostitution, fags and trannies marching in the streets, communists constantly bombing or shooting or clubbing people (seriously, there wasn't a single year between 1918 and 1933 where commies were machine gunning people in the streets, bombing buildings, burning buildings, or clubbing people with batons for attending political rallies), constant humiliating, degeneracy, and filth. People were hopeless, depressed, and angry. Then Hitler promised to make it all go away and Germany said "fuck it, why not". And the more the Nazis delivered on their promises to make the commies, fags, and trannies go away, the more support they got. Now look at America. Something like a third of the fucking population supports secession, 10% of the population supported fascism in 2017, when people were optimistic about Trump; what do you think that ratio looks like now, after niggers and commies were on a rampage for a year, the election was blatantly stolen, the economy is going back to shit, people are sick of lockdowns and other plandemic bullshit, and constant parades of fags and trannies wanting to molest our children? If we formed a new party that adopted a platform merging Libertarian ideas (legalize weed, low taxes, gun rights, etc.) and Fascist/National Socialist ideas (economy, social welfare, purging degenerates, etc.), we'd appeal to pretty much the entire spectrum of the right, most of the independents, and even some of the left who are sick of AOC and Bernie and their shit. And once in power... All bets are fucking off. It doesn't even matter if they rig the elections once they realize how popular and dangerous we are; we'll just seize power, point to the fraud as justification, and when they complain that we didn't follow the rules (as if they did either), we'll respond "stop quoting laws to us, we have weapons". And then start fixing things. Starting by making all the problems go away forever, as promised.
(44.20 KB 1200x800 natcap.png)
>>9430 >a platform merging Libertarian ideas (legalize weed, low taxes, gun rights, etc.) and Fascist/National Socialist ideas (economy, social welfare, purging degenerates, etc.) If this involves physical remove of jews and other shitskins, I can get behind this
(89.35 KB 720x615 1592061068743.jpg)
>>9433 Physical removal, so to speak? But of course.
>>9430 The central problem with your idea is that right from the start you choose to compromise, compromise on the very foundation of what we're going for, that has never and will never work. We could theoretically ally with those who oppose us to take down the system but we could not rule in cooperation with them, Libertarians especially, ignoring that there are many things we would do that are similar, they would oppose any and all eugenic measures we might take, a good portion would oppose removal or summary execution of subhumans and even jews.
(236.36 KB 1658x996 1586013216027.png)
(58.25 KB 1170x432 1595077839700.jpg)
(123.55 KB 519x699 1569028336954.jpg)
(74.52 KB 896x960 1567447792895.jpg)
(127.44 KB 640x820 1592528135678.jpg)
>>9445 Who cares? Once we're in power, their opinions are meaningless. Same as once the Nazis took power in Germany. You think most Germans at the time supported sterilization or extermination of retards? Or concentration camps for faggots, Jews, and subversives? You only 'compromise' to appeal to people in the beginning and lead them further down the path to where they need to be. As you grow in power, you discard everything you no longer need and continue to purify your platform and purpose. There will even be a time when you have to purge your ranks of those who will go too far, too fast, in order to keep them from fucking everything up. It's like you never studied Hitler's rise to power.
>>9448 >retarded wishful thinking post >retarded off topic image spam >tells others to study history when he clearly doesn't even know what he's talking about What can men do against such reckless newfaggotry?
>>9448 You think we can take power that way, we cannot, for one the tactics of 1930s will not work today, Germany was still structurally sound, which is why Hitler wasn't killed when his initial rebellion failed and why he switched tact from Revolution through force to Revolution through election. We should not, and if we want to win can not compromise to appeal to people, most of whom, even if they are dissatisfied with the current regime, are well and truly programmed against us. Hitler didn't compromise on a lot but where he did, mostly with Christians, it fucked him over. I have studied his rise, and know where he would say he erred, he took power, yeah, electorally, yeah, but his entire reign was struck with repeated disunity led by Christians against his reign he had 22 separate assassination attempts after all and for the expert job he did the Allies could not be and, were not, behind all of them. He compromised on certain positions after taking power as well, to attempt to unify with the disparate German Right Wing, which allowed traitors into positions they did not deserve, the first instance I can think of that backfired, is that he failed to purge the military of dissident elements, and more. We do not have his luxuries, we cannot compromise, and he should not have, we xannit be merciful wand he shouldn't have been, we can work with our enemies where it serves our purposes, but we cannot let them have any ground, and that is exactly what you wish to do as shown in your post. National Socialists would probably let many things you might think of as libertarian pass. In the instance of Marijuana, it has many ecological benefits, and in the form of hemp many many uses, it should be grown, but it should not be left uncontrolled or allowed to be "improved" in the way it has been today, but it shouldn't be overly penalized and it has uses in many religious rites of Non-Abrahamists some of which are ancient, Low taxes were a mark of NSDAP Germany, as were gun rights for Racial Germans.
>>9448 >You only 'compromise' to appeal to people in the beginning and lead them further down the path to where they need to be. This is not how compromises work. Once you compromise with groups such as Christians, conservatives, reactionaries, and Libertarians, then you'll need to adopt their stupid beliefs just to not face with a revolt or betrayal to keep things going at a consistent pace. If the National Socialists never appealed to anyone but their own, then they've could of established pagan philosophies and theologies and began raising and educating Germans to become the ideal man or woman. Giving what our opposers wanted lead to Hitler failing to create most of his social policies that would of improved Germany's health conditions, institutions that would indoctrinate the youth to become strong and grown to competely loyal to the NS, and rewritten laws to engineer society to be more positive and Aryan. I don't know how many times we are going to have to tell you that lolbergs can never be National Socialists, because they are our enemies, ideologically, religiously, and metaphysically.
>>9401 >an American version of Bunny Drop I would pay to see this. The guy raising his perfect little wife would be adorable. And instructive.
>>9445 The thing is that once you get power you just physically remove the weaklings and cucks within your ranks. All serious revolutionary movements have done this in the past. For example, Hitler relied on many 'Strasserists' and those who wanted the Third Reich to be much more radical on the economic front. Once he came to power, it was not long until he purged their major figures and destroyed any chance they had of getting their goals achieved. This is because he knew that they would derail the ascension of Germany back to greatness. Another good example comes from the opposite end of the spectrum. The Bolsheviks were allied with all sorts of anarchists and milquetoast socialists. Once they got grip on power they gradually purged and imprisoned these people because they had outlived their usefulness to the seizure and consolidation of power. The same here applies with lolberts. If we hypothetically allied with them to an extent, we would inevitably be dumping the major figureheads of this movement into concentration camps after we had seized power from the Jew. Lolberts are ultimately poison to the construction of a strong organic community with their ideas of individualism and capitalism. One doesn't even have to throw that many people in camps. The average person is a do-nothing lemming coward.
>>9457 >dude physical removal LMAO >Hitler did it, clearly must be a good idea Hitler was a faggot that aped Mussolini's masterful rise to power without understanding any single component of the plan, let alone the spirit behind it. Hitler's plan with regards to his allies of convenience was extremely subversive and traitorous, and much like Lenin's plan it destroyed any hope of future success: you can't build an empire on top of petty power struggles and criminal behaviour, you need strength and a vision. >The average person is a do-nothing lemming coward. Why are you even here? You clearly aren't a fascist, if that's your opinion of the average countryman you're not even a nationalist.
>>9463 >You clearly aren't a fascist, if that's your opinion of the average countryman you're not even a nationalist. Absolutely horrendous bait. If you actually believe this you are just a liberal and nothing more. Fascism is predicated on the repudiation of democracy, and the idea of the perfect rationality and equality of the masses. Fascism has always lauded authority, hierarchy and true natural-born leaders over the rule of the mob. The lemming phenomenon is literally undeniable. Most people are followers. Very few are leaders and true free-thinkers. If you think that is is a necessarily 'hateful' statement that expresses nothing but scorn of White people, think again. It is a basic fact about reality that you need to acknowledge if you want to be able to do any sort of realistic political thinking at all. Just as it is important to be able to acknowledge race with race realism, or the differences between the sexes with 'sex realism', there always needs to be a 'lemming realism'. Without understanding lemmings you fail to understand politics. >Hitler's plan with regards to his allies of convenience was extremely subversive and traitorous He killed a bunch of crypto-Marxists and literal homosexuals. Fuck them.
>>9457 >The thing is that once you get power you just physically remove the weaklings and cucks within your ranks. Not against removing these people but it seems like it would dis incentivize libertarian groups from allying with fascists if they knew they were eventually going to be purged. I'm also against kosherizing or 'watering down' the message for the sake of broad appeal. We should avoid associating with lolberts whenever possible though complete avoidance might not be realistic, especially in the United States.
>>9463 >Hitler was a faggot that aped Mussolini's masterful rise to power without understanding any single component of the plan, What masterful plan? Hitler rose to greater power for a reason, secondly Mussolini shot himself in the foot with his campaigns in Africa and attempts to take the Balkans. Mussolini's plans were not working nor going to work. >Why are you even here? >You clearly aren't a fascist, if that's your opinion of the average countryman you're not even a nationalist. How do you call yourself a fascist and not understand that niggercattle are absolute morons? Fascists are not liberal nationalists, we are extremely hierarchical.
(89.20 KB 633x950 murdoch chan irl.jpg)
>>9516 >>9518 >>9519 Seriously, where do I find a fascist wife? I'd like to bring White children into the world but I have no idea where to find a suitable woman.
>>9463 >Mussolini's master plan Why does every Italian fascist aka homofascism, continue to think that the Mussolini was some sort of genius and had the best military out of the axis when the Social Republic failed because of him and his moronic military staff?
>>9521 >Seriously, where do I find a fascist wife? You don't. The only women who are like that are crazy dykes and/or narcissists only looking for skinhead dick and money- sorta like Sinead. You find a gullible, impressionable woman, that is either young and/or on the autistic spectrum, and then you can push your beliefs onto her. It's not nice or thoughtful by any means and it will take some time, but it will work. Think of how ZOG brainwashes women into sluts. You can do the same thing, but in the inverse.
>>9528 >sorta like Sinead. I don't know who that is. >You find a gullible, impressionable woman, that is either young and/or on the autistic spectrum, and then you can push your beliefs onto her. I was thinking more of a woman who isn't a complete slut and would be receptive to 'belief pushing' in the first place. Not sure how young you're thinking, but I'm not sure about the whole autism thing. I have autism myself and I don't want the risk of autistic children to be any bigger than it needs to be.
>>9530 >I'm autistic how can I find wahman? Yeah, good luck with that, son.
>>9530 If you're autistic and you want a woman, your only chance at this point is probably to kidnap one. Of course, that's highly illegal and you should never do anything illegal under any circumstances, ever, for any reason but if you pulled that off I personally wouldn't judge you. Life finds a way, I guess.
(135.80 KB 499x499 bear.png)
>>9531 >>9532 >Implying you two fags don't have autism as well
>>9532 >If you're autistic and you want a woman, your only chance at this point is probably to kidnap one I doubt he's autistic in the Chris Chan sense. This anon is probably 99% normal with small eccentricities. Psychiatry is a scam, wake up.
(264.00 KB 2391x1139 1627326104513.png)
(195.26 KB 604x829 1600015620981.jpg)
Unlocking this, but child marriage discussion, pro or con, will be deleted after this point in the thread. I think everyone got their arguments out, take it somewhere else if you want to do that.
>>9701 America was a judiac shithole before and now, sk I don't care if they found it to be acceptable. American colonists were anti-nature, so not a good representation. And most of your charts and graphs only show that younger teens and adults are the most attractive to males. Cuckchanners like you need to stop crossboarding and stay on your honeypot.
>>9705 >American colonists were anti-nature How? So I guess the colonists should of let the natives be left alone. But that wouldnt follow the idea of might is right, which is part of national socialism.
>>9712 >How? So I guess the colonists should of let the natives be left alone. American colonists were bible cucks who believed they had total dominion over nature, rapidly deforestized and helped kill off many ecosystems. >might is right Americans killed natives for money and the exploitation of the lands they sought after. Might is right concerns the sake of our survival and some cases were justified killings because the natives wouldn't come to peace and continued to raid and murder Whites. But other times it was justified merely to increase shekels. National Socialism is blood and soil, while American republicism and rationality is blood and money.
>>7034 Go back to cuckchan with these low IQ memes.
>>9433 How will you purge the degenerate if you are the degenerate? Libertarianism is a dead end, it should not be considered.
>>9716 Didn't you know? To fight degeneracy we have to be degenerates as well!
(191.73 KB 622x582 420.png)
>>9716 I don't see what is degenerate about low taxes and gun rights. Smoking that dank Cythian herb could be degenerate though, maybe even more so than drinking.
>>9718 Libertarianism is more than just "low taxes and gun rights" and these things aren't exclusive to Liberarians in the first place. It's Judiac and centers on asociality. Libertarianism cannot work with National Socialism, what you're doing is LARPing as much as I hate using the word.
>>9718 You have to go back, boomer >low taxes and gun rights Is conservatism. Libertarianism is more akin to Anarchocapitalism. A jewish wet dream. Libertarianism is the exact opposite of Fascism. Where Fascism puts the group and the good of the many first and foremost. Libertarianism puts the wants and needs of the individual first.
>>9712 > But that wouldnt follow the idea of might is right, which is part of national socialism. "Might is right" is not a prescriptive phrase, it's descriptive. >>9718 >I don't see what is degenerate about low taxes and gun rights. I'm a National Socialist who values the integrity of the group and believes in a hierarchical society and even I support low taxes and gun-rights, retard. If you think that is all lolbertarianism is you are bluepilled in the extreme.
>>9527 >Why does every Italian fascist aka homofascism, continue to think that the Mussolini was some sort of genius and had the best military out of the axis when the Social Republic failed because of him and his moronic military staff? Because the indiviuals who claims this are likely reactionaries who think that Mussolini was some trad Catholic and some high IQ genius, despite the fact that Mussolini was quite incompetent late in the game. >>9718 >low taxes and gun rights Are you from r/thedonald or something? The NSDAP armed their own populace and had less restrictive gun regulations than America did in the 1930s to 1940s did. I don't know anything about taxes, but I'm sure they had something like tax reliefs. I find it funny that this is your only defense for (((libertarianism))).
(146.99 KB 793x794 for-my-greatest-ally.jpg)
>>9720 >>9722 >>9724 Calm your autism. There's no need to interpret every post in the least charitable way possible just because some buzzword makes you see red. The anon I originally responded to specifically mentioned those 3 policy points, not the entire libertarian ideology. It sounds like you are not against gun rights and low taxes anyways. >>9721 National Socialist Germany had good gun rights. And you don't necessarily need high taxes to run a National Socialist state if it was run efficiently.
>>9729 >There's no need to interpret every post in the least charitable way possible just because some buzzword makes you see red You talked like a typical ancapitstan boomer and expected us fascists to not call you out? >The anon I originally responded to specifically mentioned those 3 policy points, not the entire libertarian ideology These three policies are not exclusive nor do they give any true meaning to your ideology nor interest of us to become like lolbergs. Libertarian ideals and beliefs are known to be posionous to the White race for promotion of individualism. >It sounds like you are not against gun rights and low taxes anyways. The anons here have explained our stance on guns and taxes, but we don't support these things for the same reasons you or at least any ancap does. The problem here isn't that you are a proponent of these ideas, but how you present yourself and imply that these are good for a White society for consumerist reasons as well. We oppose the idea that profit and hedonist pleasures are necessary to keep society stable and happy, while ancaps on the other hand are the opposite.
(667.33 KB 640x960 lolberg evolution.png)
>>9732 I'd call myself a National Socialist not a libertarian. I don't even really disagree with any of you which is why it's funny you are sperging out. No shit the ideological program of libertarianism is not good for us. Ideologies and labels are useful abstractions for thinking, but also limited, so if you get stuck on words you will miss a lot. For example most people who are sympathetic to "libertarian" ideas are not at their core ancaps or even ideologues. They don't support degeneracy for its own sake. If you go in assuming their motives and get it wrong you end up pushing people away for no reason. For example gun rights, low taxes, and not overly policing morality where it doesn't matter (goebbels_on_moralizing.jpg) are not exclusively in the domain of some lofty individualist commandments as codified by some jewish philosopher. While some of the motivation can be selfish, a lot of it is also just wanting basic dignity or even the health of his community. Even even if National Socialism is about working together for a common greater good, it's not about humiliating him either. So I don't think gun rights, low taxes, or less moralizing are inherently degenerate or even libertarian positions. And they could used to appeal to "libertarians" for reasons deeper than ideology, without watering down National Socialism at all.
>>9734 >They don't support degeneracy for its own sake Inherently they do. Himmler addressed this well on the topic of homosexuality. What happens behind closed doors is not hermetically sealed from the rest of society, it ripples outwards. The 'live and let live' ideas of lolberts are destructive to healthy societies, as is their worship of the idea of negative freedom (freedom from constraint as the highest good). If wanting to ban pornography, or to keep homosexuals and trannies away from children, or to tell women that they should not be whores (and indeed to punish whores) is 'moralizing', this is proof that lolbert-type ideas are inherently permissive of degeneracy. Lolberts have no defense against this sort of degeneracy because they have an ideology founded on individualism and against all authority. Their ideas of 'freedom' inherently lead to this moral anarchy we live under today.
>>9734 A lot of people on /fascist/ have this weird urge to be angry all the time and interpret every post in the worst possible light.
>>9734 >d call myself a National Socialist not a libertarian No you are a libertarian which is why you've post lolberg memes and tried to defend it. >I don't even really disagree with any of you which is why it's funny you are sperging out. No one sperged out, we called you out for being cringe and now you're assblasted that you got called out. This isn't the first time either, because you argued that states are cuckoldry, which leans towards anarchism. Now you're just outright lying. >No shit the ideological program of libertarianism is not good for us Then stop shilling it. >Ideologies and labels are useful abstractions for thinking, but also limited, so if you get stuck on words you will miss a lot Anarchism is nothing useful or meaningful at all. If you agree then don't post another anarcho meme again. >For example gun rights, low taxes, and not overly policing morality where it doesn't matter (goebbels_on_moralizing.jpg) are not exclusively in the domain of some lofty individualist commandments as codified by some jewish philosopher No one said this, we know this you imbecile. We're not arguing against this, we're arguing against YOU and the crap you have been posting for the past months. >>9736 >(1) How are we wrong for getting upset or questioning someone who tries to inject lolbergism into National Socialism? Are you samefagging or also a newfag?
>>9736 Nice IP hop
(155.60 KB 297x766 oy vey the lolbergoyim know.png)
>>9738 I'm not shilling libertarianism and I'm not these other posters you think I am. I did post a mcnuke meme and a black sun over ancap flag as a light joke though. Is that all it takes to get you all riled up? Pull the stick out of your ass.
>>9740 >I'm not shilling libertarianism and I'm not these other posters you think I am. You are the only lolberg here who post memes similar to >>9448 and >>9433. A true NatSoc doesn't like to his fellow brother.
>lolbert shilling >nazbol shilling <all within the same timeframe Is it a coincidence?
>>9740 >as a light joke What type of person jokes with the black sun and paints it over the ancapitalism flag? This clearly shows that there is a desire for a synthesis. Nazbol was a joke and now there are /pol/acks who take it seriously. I've seen one ancap on jewtube who post similar memes to your own and he was never joking about connecting fascism with ancap ideals. What is the joke you are trying to get us to laugh at?
>>9742 >like meant lie
>>9743 The ancap has always been here though. His posts are completely different from the nazbol shill anyway, so I doubt that there is a connection other than the possibility that some cuckchanners have lost their way on here. The lolberg still brought more quality to this board, funny enough.
(118.17 KB 1238x700 Scythians.jpg)
>>9735 >Inherently they do... The 'live and let live' ideas of lolberts are destructive to healthy societies I agree with basically your entire post. I just don't think most people who might call themselves libertarians are hardcore about it to the point you could even call them ideologues. They aren't on forums arguing about philosophy books. They aren't pro-faggotry or pornography or whoring. They are real life normalfags, White men who are generally culturally conservative, and would comprise a lot of the masses of a future national socialist society. These people are libertarian-lights, if you could even call them that. More like colonial americana or even just the European male spirit of wanting the basic dignity of not being someone else's bitch. When I say against dehumanizing moralization, I'm talking about the arbitrary busybody banning of anything fun like beer, owning guns, your wife sucking your dick, or possibly even weed. For example a lot of anons are very sensitive about the idea of alcohol being banned because our ancestors drank it. If that's the rationale, maybe it makes sense to allow weed as well, even if there is an asterisk next to it just like there is with cultural norms around alcohol.
>>9744 Anarcho-fascism is an ancient meme. Not sure what else to tell you. This is the first time I've seen someone take it seriously to the point of getting mad about it though.
>>9749 >Anarcho-fascism is an ancient meme It was never funny and never meant to be posted over and over again with lolberg sayings such as >I don't see what is degenerate about low taxes and gun rights.Smoking that dank Cythian herb could be degenerate are jokes and a meme.
>>9748 Well if they're not imageboard-browsing lolbert spergs and are the sort of normalfags you are talking about, most of these people are probably convertible in some sense. I don't really mind them, in fact I sympathize with them in broad outlines more than than anything even if they are bluepilled on a lot else. >When I say against dehumanizing moralization, I'm talking about the arbitrary busybody banning of anything fun like beer, owning guns, your wife sucking your dick, or possibly even weed. Ideally a lot of the shit you have in mind wouldn't be outright banned but it would be heavily culturally discouraged in various ways, mainly through education, media, etc. Weed is basically nigger-tier though. Herodotus only remarks in a single verse or two of his work that Scythians use hemp seeds to hotbox themselves and do this in place of water-baths (which he says they never take). Of course he says that they are getting high on it at the same time, but these people were not any sort of stoner degenerates like some people paint them as (not trying to say that is what you are doing though).
>>9752 >>9748 To add on to what I said, it is a sign of poor governance if a government simply bans things without trying to morally reshape the populace. If no one has the desire to do a certain practice or thing, it is silly to explicitly ban it, or even if it is banned, the law will seldom be put into action against such individuals then. Fix the minds of the people more so than constraining their choices and not fixing them first.
(71.63 KB 370x405 1620007506407-2.jpg)
(47.33 KB 370x405 1620007506407-0.jpg)
(79.76 KB 467x405 1620007506407-1.jpg)
(9.09 KB 176x176 channels4_profile.jpg)
>>9527 >Why does every Italian fascist aka homofascism >homofascism Fuck off NatSoc troon, you are literally projecting at this point. Neck yourself. You'll never be a real woman.
>>12673 as an aside, NS trannies are just attention-seekers. trannies in general are narcissists, and they're drawn to NS because it's so stigmatized and controversial. that's the only explanation for it, because otherwise it's a fundamental contradiction in terms.
(914.66 KB 1876x996 sneaker male trannies 2.png)
(3.09 MB 1280x720 tranny politics.mp4)
>>12690 That about sums it up. There's no other real explanation for this sort of phenomenon. It can only emerge in an Internet quagmire of Jewish propaganda, memes, irony-posting, porn addiction and imageboards. I sometimes wonder whether it's all irony for them, or whether they are filled with great conflict and self-hatred due to the obvious fact that their lifestyle choices are antithetical to ideas like National Socialism or even Fascism in general. Unfortunately National Socialism can attract a lot of freaks like this for the reasons you said. Hollywood Jews have constructed a stereotype that just simply never existed, and due to this, we are forced to suffer from diaper-wearing, estrogen-injecting troons
>>12673 >Fuck off NatSoc troon, Another retard who can't read. I was mocking Mussolini-faggots, because he had way more fags in his party and was beloved by many of them. There is no such thing as NatSoc troon, they're just feds and attention-seekers, and most of these queers are Nazbols anyway, so I don't know you're calling them NatSoc. I guess this confirms that Italian fascism are for niggers.
(1.86 MB 1210x6307 essay1.jpg)
(1.83 MB 1210x6291 essay2.jpg)
I see some positive responses and I am glad to see level headed men with a sense of honor and pragmatism. But I am disheartened to see nigger/kike/mudslime morality in what is supposed to be the way of Aryans. Yes it is true that most women today have great faults, you already know them. You know about the laws and how they are tailored to encourage women to see us as enemies/prey. Some of you have allowed this moment of weakness in our kind and culture to turn your mind to ways that are unnatural to us. Out of fear. You fear what a woman might do if she is not treated as an object, you fear she might cheat on you, she might be with many men, that she would be showing only evil if she is not subjugated and abused by one man. This is the morality that mudslimes have and why they cover their women head to toe in potato sacks, they cannot trust each other not to take each other’s wives. This is antithetical to our soul. It is precisely in Aryan societies that we see the highest amount of trust, reliability and honor both between men and between woman and man. Some of you have brought up the Kidnapping of the Sabines or suggested 12-13 year old brides. You are absolute niggers. The Romans are not an objective standard of morality considering their civilization, even at its prime in Republic times, was perhaps 30-40% tops Aryan with the rest of the masses of various other Neolithic races of borderline niggers and then starting with 200BC they started having divorces, infidelity, hypocrisy, tolerance for prostitution and then Christian morality. The Romans had some good in their time, but they were a mishmash of some good and some bad. In another sense, despite smallest rate of Down Syndrome being at the age of 15 for women, there are disadvantages to a woman having children before the age of 20 in the way of behavioral/developmental issues. https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/43/6/1815/709366 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022395620309699 And then we see a society in which the Aryan element was nigh overwhelming: the Germanic tribes. 2000 years ago Tacitus was talking about them, this was a man from a society that had fought those guys for two centuries and he claimed that The Germanic tribes of 2000 years ago according to Tacitus: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/7524/7524-h/7524-h.htm The matrimonial bond is, nevertheless, strict and severe among them; nor is there anything in their manners more commendable than this. 106 Almost singly among the barbarians, they content themselves with one wife; a very few of them excepted, who, not through incontinence, but because their alliance is solicited on account of their rank, 107 practise polygamy. The wife does not bring a dowry to her husband, but receives one from him. 108 The parents and relations assemble, and pass their approbation on the presents—presents not adapted to please a female taste, or decorate the bride; but oxen, a caparisoned steed, a shield, spear, and sword. By virtue of these, the wife is espoused; and she in her turn makes a present of some arms to her husband. This they consider as the firmest bond of union; these, the sacred mysteries, the conjugal deities. That the woman may not think herself excused from exertions of fortitude, or exempt from the casualties of war, she is admonished by the very ceremonial of her marriage, that she comes to her husband as a partner in toils and dangers; to suffer and to dare equally with him, in peace and in war: this is indicated by the yoked oxen, the harnessed steed, the offered arms. Thus she is to live; thus to die. She receives what she is to return inviolate 109 and honored to her children; what her daughters-in-law are to receive, and again transmit to her grandchildren. Part 1/3
(1.76 MB 2516x1920 Loyalty 2.jpg)
(1.84 MB 2302x1920 Loyalty.jpg)
They live, therefore, fenced around with chastity; 110 corrupted by no seductive spectacles, 111 no convivial incitements. Men and women are alike unacquainted with clandestine correspondence. Adultery is extremely rare among so numerous a people. Its punishment is instant, and at the pleasure of the husband. He cuts off the hair 112 of the offender, strips her, and in presence of her relations expels her from his house, and pursues her with stripes through the whole village. 113 Nor is any indulgence shown to a prostitute. Neither beauty, youth, nor riches can procure her a husband: for none there looks on vice with a smile, or calls mutual seduction the way of the world. Still more exemplary is the practice of those states 114 in which none but virgins marry, and the expectations and wishes of a wife are at once brought to a period. Thus, they take one husband as one body and one life; that no thought, no desire, may extend beyond him; and he may be loved not only as their husband, but as their marriage. 115 To limit the increase of children, 116 or put to death any of the later progeny 117 is accounted infamous: and good habits have there more influence than good laws elsewhere. 118 110 (return) [ Ergo septae pudicitiâ agunt. Some editions have septâ pudicitiâ. This would imply, however, rather the result of the care and watchfulness of their husbands; whereas it seems the object of Tacitus to show that this their chastity was the effect of innate virtue, and this is rather expressed by septae pudicitiâ, which is the reading of the Arundelian MS.] 111 (return) [ Seneca speaks with great force and warmth on this subject: "Nothing is so destructive to morals as loitering at public entertainments; for vice more easily insinuates itself into the heart when softened by pleasure. What shall I say! I return from them more covetous ambitious, and luxurious."—Epist. vii.] 112 (return) [ The Germans had a great regard for the hair, and looked upon cutting it off as a heavy disgrace; so that this was made a punishment for certain crimes, and was resented as an injury if practiced upon an innocent person.] 113 (return) [ From an epistle of St. Boniface, archbishop of Mentz, to Ethelbald, king of England, we learn that among the Saxons the women themselves inflicted the punishment for violated chastity; "In ancient Saxony (now Westphalia), if a virgin pollute her father's house, or a married woman prove false to her vows, sometimes she is forced to put an end to her own life by the halter, and over the ashes of her burned body her seducer is hanged: sometimes a troop of females assembling lead her through the circumjacent villages, lacerating her body, stripped to the girdle, with rods and knives; and thus, bloody and full of minute wounds, she is continually met by new tormenters, who in their zeal for chastity do not quit her till she is dead, or scarcely alive, in order to inspire a dread of such offences." See Michael Alford's Annales Ecclesiae Anglo-Saxon., and Eccard.] 114 (return) [ A passage in Valerius Maximus renders it probable that the Cimbrian states were of this number: "The wives of the Teutones besought Marius, after his victory, that he would deliver them as a present to the Vestal virgins; affirming that they should henceforth, equally with themselves, abstain from the embraces of the other sex. This request not being granted, they all strangled themselves the ensuing night."—Lib. vi. 1.3.] 115 (return) [ Among the Heruli, the wife was expected to hang herself at once at the grave of her husband, if she would not live in perpetual infamy.] 116 (return) [ This expression may signify as well the murder of young children, as the procurement of abortion; both which crimes were severely punished by the German laws.] In this regard the Romans get a point as they were not afraid of killing a baby that is faulty in order to keep the bloodline pure. Same as the Spartans, another group of giga-Chad Aryans. Though I have heard of such practices existing in some Germanic tribes, under the explanation of Tacitus having not covered enough and also a different time. Seneca wrote that: "We put down mad dogs; we kill the wild, untamed ox; we use the knife on sick sheep to stop their infecting the flock; we destroy abnormal offspring at birth; children, too, if they are born weak or deformed, we drown. Yet this is not the work of anger, but of reason – to separate the sound from the worthless" 117 (return) [ Quemquam ex agnatis. By agnati generally in Roman law were meant relations by the father's side; here it signifies children born after there was already an heir to the name and property of the father.] Part 2/3
>>13321 The youths partake late of the pleasures of love, 121 and hence pass the age of puberty unexhausted: nor are the virgins hurried into marriage; the same maturity, the same full growth is required: the sexes unite equally matched 122 and robust; and the children inherit the vigor of their parents. Children are regarded with equal affection by their maternal uncles 123 as by their fathers: some even consider this as the more sacred bond of consanguinity, and prefer it in the requisition of hostages, as if it held the mind by a firmer tie, and the family by a more extensive obligation. A person's own children, however, are his heirs and successors; and no wills are made. If there be no children, the next in order of inheritance are brothers, paternal and maternal uncles. The more numerous are a man's relations and kinsmen, the more comfortable is his old age; nor is it here any advantage to be childless. 124 121 (return) [ This is illustrated by a passage in Caesar (Bell. Gall. vi. 21): "They who are the latest in proving their virility are most commended. By this delay they imagine the stature is increased, the strength improved, and the nerves fortified. To have knowledge of the other sex before twenty years of age, is accounted in the highest degree scandalous."] 122 (return) [ Equal not only in age and constitution, but in condition. Many of the German codes of law annex penalties to those of both sexes who marry persons of inferior rank.] 123 (return) [ Hence, in the history of the Merovingian kings of France, so many instances of regard to sisters and their children appear, and so many wars undertaken on their account.] 124 (return) [ The court paid at Rome to rich persons without children, by the Haeredipetae, or legacy-hunters, is a frequent subject of censure and ridicule with the Roman writers.] It is a principal incentive to their courage, that their squadrons and battalions are not formed by men fortuitously collected, but by the assemblage of families and clans. Their pledges also are near at hand; they have within hearing the yells of their women, and the cries of their children. These, too, are the most revered witnesses of each man's conduct, these his most liberal applauders. To their mothers and their wives they bring their wounds for relief, nor do these dread to count or to search out the gashes. The women also administer food and encouragement to those who are fighting. They even suppose somewhat of sanctity and prescience to be inherent in the female sex; and therefore neither despise their counsels, 57 nor disregard their responses. 58 We have beheld, in the reign of Vespasian, Veleda, 59 long reverenced by many as a deity. Aurima, moreover, and several others, 60 were formerly held in equal veneration, but not with a servile flattery, nor as though they made them goddesses. 61 In case any subhumans thinks that women somehow cause issues if they don’t cover head to toe: The dress of the women does not differ from that of the men; except that they more frequently wear linen, 104 which they stain with purple; 105 and do not lengthen their upper garment into sleeves, but leave exposed the whole arm, and part of the breast. Part 3/4
(136.87 KB 715x904 Gentleman.jpg)
>>13322 As you can see. Tacitus tells us that: They waited until marriage, and “did not have knowledge of the other sex until 20” as it was scandalous otherwise and they believed humans should be at their peak development for the strongest offspring. They punished infidelity harshly, avoided polygamy except in rare occasions of politics, not for pleasure. Men and women respected each other and there was harmony between them. There was no need for humiliation, subjugation or abuse of women for them to be decent and loving. The virtues of women came not only because of men’s influence but also because of personal virtue and choice. A mistake that I see is that some of you attribute the characteristics of this age in which we live to all women forever. You say that if a woman is not married by 14 she becomes a whore and as such we need to marry them young to prevent that. Think for one second. We have the majority of men who are weak and effeminate today with lower testosterone than men in their 60’s who grew up in a more masculine environment. Most men do not say no to an opportunity of sex without commitment today. We have an environment of degeneracy for both men and women. In the case where we have gone on the offensive against our enemies, killed them and rule in society we will no longer have such conditions, as we can shape nutrition, training, education, entertainment, information and everything according to Natural Law. Thus it would be retarded to say that in that world a woman would have to marry as soon as possible so that she is not promiscuous as promiscuity will be harshly punished for both sexes. All societies of Aryans that have had any desire to be decent and committed in sexuality did not require subjugation or teen marriage to prevent degeneracy, the implication being that when society is decent you can trust others. And Whites have the most in group trust of all races. To say you cannot leave women any agency because she will go with other men is to say that you cannot trust your brothers, it means you are a shitskin. The Natural Order is: Man leads, Woman follows. This is the best way to understand the dynamic between sexes. Right now men are not leading, and as such women are not following. Women don’t have the power to destroy society, they only have the power to do what men tell them to do and what men tolerate them to do. Women did not have the right to vote, but men made the mistake of giving it to them. Women even today are overwhelmingly, 84%, desiring to be stay at home mothers, even despite the propaganda of today their instinct is still working fine and needs but a man to take the lead. It is clear that before women can be corrupted by jews, first the jew needs to corrupt the men. Pleasure, luxury and unnatural desires of all kinds are seeped into the behavior of men, then they are tolerant and lazy, then their women are turned against them easily. The first and foremost element in any civilization’s strength is their men. If men fail, women fail, because women do nothing but follow into our behavior. If men seek pleasure, women will grant it to them, if men seek honor, women will follow them. I am informed by all of the above that if men have a code of honor and freedom, the 2 main core characteristics of Aryans according to Alfred Rosenberg, there is nothing that can stand against us. If men are orderly in their sexuality they are orderly in everything. Man must be his own master and live in accord with the laws of nature and that means treating woman with the respect that is due our race. Understanding that we are not equals, but that we can and should respect and love one another.
>>13319 >The Romans are not an objective standard of morality considering their civilization, even at its prime in Republic times, was perhaps 30-40% tops Aryan with the rest of the masses of various other Neolithic races of borderline niggers The Romans were Aryan and didn't have that much of different traditions and cultures from the proto-Indo Europeans. The Romans and their views on women weren't any different from the Indo-Aryans or Germanics. Any DNA test that says otherwise is a lie, and the only people who hate Rome so much that they slander them are likely kaliacc radfem trannies or Vargists.
>>13323 >did not have knowledge of the other sex until 20 I could only see this having a reverse effect where there would be a lot of young homosexual acts sorta like a all-boys summer camp effect.
>>13383 If i recall Tacitus never had any contact with Germanic peoples at all, he was building iff if others accounts and records, and as Romans are noted for shitting all over their enemies, it can't be held as trustworthy beyond all doubt some of what he says is true, but not all of it is, and what is asid of the treatemetn of women isn't except in the cases of Serresses or Völvas.
>>13383 >>13388 It was common for men to wait into their twenties to marry in many societies. It’s better for the man to established somewhat first. It doesn’t matter with women, that’s why one can marry them at like 15 or 16 and have no problem
>>13388 (Heil) >and as Romans are noted for shitting all over their enemies, it can't be held as trustworthy beyond all doubt some of what he says is true, but not all of it is Except Tacitus and the accounts and records he had taken as inspiration to write his perspective the Germanics seem less likely to be untrue or biased. If I'm correct I think even Caesar had many positive thinfs to say about them as well with the Britons. Tactius also comes to the conclusion that the Germanics and Romans were very similar if not outright equal. I don't see the lie in that the Germans waited until early to mid adulthood to have sex, tortued gays and whores, and hung cowards and traitors. It makes sense, considering Indo-Europeans have shown similar sentiments and spent a large sum of their lives trying to prove themselves worthy as men or women within their nation. Marrying around your 20s, instead of early as 14 years old has its own advantages, so this whole idea that men and women will become hedonists if left unmarried young is unlikely and really the fault of the father not taking more control over his children if they are dishonoring their family's honor and pride.
>>13390 For men, yes, women, no, as the Law of Manu says and as all traditions I have yet found, women should be married by 14 or so, if not a bit earlier as the Vedas suggests in a roundabout way, to avoid their corruption, period, the earlier you give your daughter away the more she will become what her husband wants in a woman. >>13399 Tacitus and the accounts he used are not entirely truthful no matter what excuses you want to use, and they have not been preserved exactly as they were. on the chastity and killing whores and faggots and shirkers and traitors, that shit is obviously true, we have physical evidence to corroborate it regardless, but no tribe who actually seeks to dominate has ever treated women the way we are today. It is the duty of the father to marry his daughter young enough that she can still grow into a fine wife for her husband, this doesn't mean disrespect, it has a purpose, dislike it or disagree all you wish. And to a remark in your previous post, This always applies to women, all women, with rare exceptions that prove the rule. Yes in healthy societies women themselves inflict the punishment for impurity and adultery, but we are not in a healthy society and the only way we return to, or recreate one, is not by letting women run around as they have, while we chase after them, men must be back in control and this will require taking off any prohibitions about violence against women that are ones own, up to and including death. If you think this implies abuse, you need to check your shit for preconceived notions, look again at the history of our race and realize that when women step out of line men must be able to rein them in, without question, and every death of a woman who breaks the rules, will serve as an example to show women what not to be and how not to be until they enforce it on their own, which could take many generations of utter control. It is not Antithetical to our souls to take what we want and do with it what we will, like all our ancestors, the Norse, Celts, Saxons and Germans, and more all did. In summation, it will require violence. It will require barring women from owning property or inheriting things whether land or titles from their fathers once again for a thousand and one reasons,. It will require removing puritanical feminist notions of what is a "proper" age to marry. It will require a loss of moronic ideas that "rape" is a real thing, that isn't simply fucking kidnapping, or that it is traumatic as it's thought of today. Most of our ancestors took women in war, most of these women did not have a choice, and if they refused to give their new husband what he wanted, he simply took it. Yes, most will have only one wife as they always have, it's all most men can abide even among kings, but polygamy will be rather unrestricted for a variety of purposes. You want to call me a nigger you might as well be calling our gods niggers as most of them engaged in shit you would find "Niggerish" , talk about high trust all you wish, but you want to know how you create such a society? NOT BY BEING NICE. AND SOFT.
>>13489 A man may seek to make things good as they were with our ancestors or make things as they are with subhuman races. That indicates what he is. You are ignoring all wisdom and evidence of how our ancestors were in order to promote a subhuman, rapist, pedophile way of life. You are as much of a subhuman as any non-Aryan and will perish with them.
>>13498 I'm pointing out the only way we get there, you seem to think wecan put women back in their proper place by being nice, when being nice only got us here, you are plainly delusional, It wasn't just the romans who treated women as described above the Vedics did too, as did the German and Norse before their societies hit a decline, and became subverted by our enemy, why is it that you're counter-signalling the only way our problem with our women is actually solved, sound policies that all of our ancestirs would tell you to do if you actually listened to them.
>>13489 >Tacitus and the accounts he used are not entirely truthful no matter what excuses you want to use, and they have not been preserved exactly as they were Says who? Some rando on an imageboard for internet fascists?
>>13498 >You are ignoring all wisdom and evidence of how our ancestors were No, I think that's you.
>>13504 Yes, even if it is absolute fucking truth, which nothing written down ever is, you are dreaming of a result that is accomplished by rigid unceasing application of violence, to the point where women are so virtuous that they enforce the rules themselves, do you really think women will get there just being gently guided with headpats and nice words?
>>13498 Show where that anon is wrong. You are insulting our ancestors when you call them subhumans, rapists and pedophilies.
I hope this thread doesn't go the route of posting another pedophile pipe dream about undressing and spooning seven-year-old girls again and pretending that shit was ever normal.
>>13597 >Yes, even if it is absolute fucking truth No, it means you're wrong and you have no ground to stand on that proves Tacitus wrong and how our ancestors work. I have no reason to listen to some guy on the internet versus a professional historian who is mostly precise and unbiased on their knowledge of events during his time and before him. Until you prove me wrong, you are just someone on this board spouting nonsense and doesn't know what he is talking about. Tacitus wasn't even saying that wahmen in Germania treated in a egilitarian fashion, but that their females adopted the politics and personalities of their husbands that they could almost been as equal. >, you are dreaming of a result that is accomplished by rigid unceasing application of violence The Romans and Greeks were not violent against women and denounced such a thing unless it were reasonable, nor had to use it to obtain a woman's hand in marriage or respect. >the point where women are so virtuous that they enforce the rules themselves This literally cannot happen at all. Even when they are "virtuous" they still need to be ruled. Even Christian and Buddhist nuns acknowledge this. > do you really think women will get there just being gently guided with headpats and nice words? I never implied this, are you reading my post well? I'm against this idea, by your post it seems that this is what you are looking for in a White society. My point here is that Tacitus is correct and had admiration for things the Germans could do that the Romans failed to accomplish.
>>13602 >and pretending that shit was ever normal.
(24.17 MB SS Paladin.pdf)
PART 1/2 >>13599 I already did. In the 4 part post about the Germanic tribes. They married from 20 and older. Read, nigger. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/7524/7524-h/7524-h.htm Also, I was not calling our ancestors those things, but the anon. As for our ancestors, they had times of decline in which they were predominantly evil and times in which they were predominantly good and honorable, those are the times in which we should look into and learn from. >>13613 Romans, Greeks, Egyptians and the Aryans in India all had something in common. Even at the peak of those civilizations the Aryan element varied from very small in the case of India to maybe 40% in south Europe. On the other hand the Germans were overwhelmingly Aryan without shitskins to pollute their society and way of life. We see a distinction in some ways including marriage and women. The Germans were of the idea of not rushing virgins to marriage and that the counsel of women is valuable (in a society that has been fixed, not now like in ours). A reasonable inference from this discrepancy is that when a society is predominantly Aryan, blood and honor, the principles and laws of these people are going to be superior to Aryans who are sharing their society with subhumans. We see the Germans in their own corner of the world, unaffected by other races and left to their own devices, out of their own impulses, purely out of nothing except their own nature they have laws and harmony between man and woman that put all other societies to shame. Of course the Aryans in societies with shitskins had to enact a stronger control on their women, they were surrounded by monsters. This shows that we should learn from them, but not emulate them. As we know, the answer is a world in which only Whites exist, and then only Aryans. Whites of a noble character in the image of the aliens who created us. In another sense there is one more issue with the Laws of Manu. Since the oldest writing we have is still thousands of years after the fact there is no telling to what degree it might have been altered as the Aryan civilization in India declined. They did race mix at one point, they lost everything. We see how the spirituality was perverted and degraded as time went by. Who's to say that this is not applicable to the laws? That the laws became more in line with the shitskins who now had more and more power in society is only logical. There is a saying in my country: Not everything that flies is edible. Just because our ancestors may have done it that does not make it the right way. It has to be judged in a larger context. >>13611 They don't get it. They think if a woman is not tied to the kitchen she will sleep with every man she finds, ignoring that if this were true it would indicate some serious issues with the men in that society that they are willing to jump at the opportunity of promiscuous sex. All times of rise/morality/honor of our ancestors show a lovely harmony between man and woman. The woman does not require violence to be kept in line, she only requires a man who follows the laws of nature, acts like a leader and makes it clear to her that without his leadership she won't survive. Women understand this easily when men are strong and honorable. When men are weak of course women do not understand. Anons here are going to have a pleasant surprise after we pile up body upon body, how lovely a woman's character will be when you come home covered in someone's blood and tell her you both get to live another day.
>>13611 >No, it means you're wrong and you have no ground to stand on that proves Tacitus wrong and how our ancestors work. Your argument here is defeated by you here >This literally cannot happen at all. Even when they are "virtuous" they still need to be ruled even Christian and Buddhist nuns acknowledge this. Especially considering I never said nor implied otherwise. >I have no reason to listen to some guy on the internet versus a professional historian who is mostly precise and unbiased on their knowledge of events during his time and before him. Until you prove me wrong, you are just someone on this board spouting nonsense and doesn't know what he is talking about. Tacitus wasn't even saying that wahmen in Germania treated in a egilitarian fashion, but that their females adopted the politics and personalities of their husbands that they could almost been as equal. You don't have to listen. You just have to think for a single fucking second, on the following question HOW DID THEIR SOCIETY GET THAT WAY, IF TACITUS IS COMPLETELY 100% CORRECT? The answer is DING DING DING rigid, unceasing, application of violence by men onto women. this does not mean or imply Abuse, in the manner that you seem to be assuming, completely unfounded, by the way. it means that the man who rules the house must have the authority, unquestioned and unfetterred to enforce those rules which we all agree on with whatever violence he deems necessary, up to and including death. >The Romans and Greeks were not violent against women and denounced such a thing unless it were reasonable, nor had to use it to obtain a woman's hand in marriage or respect. Yes they were, incredibly violent in comparison to even some of the harshest christian homes around, especially prior to the Second Punic War, which began their slow decline into a feminism nearly as horrible as today. We do not get to these heights without stripping women of their rights and allowing violence top be applied as her owner(Father or Husband or Son or other male family member in the absence of those three) sees fit, would some of this be considered abuse today? perhaps, would it in the time of the height of Roman or Greek or German civilizations? probably not. >I never implied this, are you reading my post well? I'm against this idea, by your post it seems that this is what you are looking for in a White society. My point here is that Tacitus is correct and had admiration for things the Germans could do that the Romans failed to accomplish. One of the points in the big three post of Tacitus disavowing violence against women as niggerish(when it is not) is quite literally pointing out that saxon women are noted to have carried out punishments on adulterers and whores themselves, in quite brutal fashion, that is what I meant by "so virtuous that they enforce the rules themselves". And where is it said that the romans could not do it themselves? they had already passed the point at which they had done that, and were less than a hundred years from the peak of feminism in their society and the beginning of their freefall collapse.
(423.53 KB 1092x1052 Man and Woman.jpg)
PART 2/2 >>8932 As for you, kike in disguise, the evidence you show there, trying to convince us that men are naturally most attracted to 14 year old girls, cites a study that has a sample of 80 men. To get anything done in science it is necessary to have a sample that is above 500. Jews have IQ studies of 60 Harvard students and parrot that as evidence of higher IQ in their own race. And one more thing you shit for brains. We live in a society that is under jewish control, a society that influences people's sexuality towards promiscuity and degeneracy. They use pornography to do this more than anything. The porn industry is gearing people to be attracted to incest, rape, pedophilia and other such semitic level fetishes that are unnatural to us. To claim that men are naturally more attracted to teenagers because the mentally ill, sexually degenerate age in which we live does so is retarded. It's as if you were to look at mental asylum and say that men are naturally insane because of what you saw there. There is no "man who wants to marry a 14 year old for life and be responsible". There are only pedophiles masquerading as such. Our ancestors (Read Caesar and Tacitus on the Germans already) tell us that marriage was to be done later rather than earlier. Stop using your imagination to fill the blanks of history based on your desires. Look at things for what they are, rather than what your penis brain wants to see. In other words, read a book you stupid nigger. For those of you who are White and want semitic sexuality in the midst of Aryans, consider the following: We cannot fix women until the current system has been eradicated along with its masters, until then the media, laws, education and information is going to be used against our existence, and that includes corruption of as many Whites as possible, including women. The focus here is to destroy the system. See pdf related. Once the system is whatever strong Aryan men want it to be. Once every aspect of life is dictated by men who have destroyed the previous system and are working towards cleansing the planet women will suffer a change. As you all know, women are a reflection of the men in their society. Right now women are promiscuous, irresponsible, acting against their own race. Look at most men, same story. Once we men open the gates of hell that exist within ourselves and reclaim our place in society women can be whatever we desire. When all elements of society tell, encourage, influence, state to women that they have to do as they are told by strong, honorable, men they follow. History shows this. What opposition could there be in the behavior of women when they see men working with all their might to build a better future for all including women? All natural instincts of survival will tell them that this is what they have been waiting for. For men to finally kill the subhumans that have offended them, that have raped them, that have destroyed our civilization. For men to bring order that sweet order that they themselves desire without opposition. Remember, even today despite EVERYTHING we have to endure, most women still desire to be stay at home mothers, they have just been robbed of the opportunity. Fixing women will be the icing on the cake and an easy task compared to what we have to do to get there. While I do not believe in women’s voting rights, there were slightly more women than men who voted for Hitler.
>>13602 There's a difference between arguing against the boomer-kike centric age of consent laws meant to stifle birthrates and fucking young kids. Plus its cunny funny
>>13630 it's true. many men get bitter over women and their scandalous ways, but they are what we mold them to be. women are generally not free thinkers, mad scientists, or leaders. they are herd animals who want to obey their tribe. under proper leadership, this makes them easy to govern, but by the same token, it makes them especially vulnerable to pernicious influence. that's especially so when the degeneracy preys on their instincts towards reciprocity and nurture (as is true of Leftism). in addition to all this, women have been targeted for corruption because they are essential to the survival of the Volk. if we take the reins, women will follow.
>>13613 >and pretending that shit was ever normal. Not seeing where your excerpt proves this. You only take the low-end mentioned because you are a pedophile faggot injecting your pet cause into everything. 18 is a grandma in your fucked-up coomer brain. >For three years shall a girl wait after the onset of her puberty; after that time, she may find for herself a husband of equal status. Funny how you included this part when you were clearly fixated on the mention of 8 years specifically, because girls weren't entering puberty at 8 back then and any only might now due to the unhealthy cattle-like diet forced on the general population. Even then, most girls are still not even entering puberty at that age. Furthermore, most of you pedophile faggots are oversized children compared to men of the past, with very few practical hobbies to support yourselves with. >>13632 No shit, retard, but writing a little fanfic about spooning seven-year-old girls does not fall under the former. To not only write that drivel but then also post it is severely autistic and perverse. Your true motives are betrayed by always pushing the conversation toward this direction. You're a horny cretin pushing your putrid fetish and pretending you have good intentions to get a foot in the door. It's clear as day. Nobody argued against some reasonable ballpark of 14-16, but anything in the double digits is a grandma in your ruined mind. Were you thinking capping your post with a tasteless pun about little girl pussy would help anyone besides other pedophiles take you seriously?
>>13630 Small mistake on my part. I misremembered the part about more women voting for Hitler than men. The reality that I double checked is that his party got more voted from women than any other party, even though there were no women in his party and pretty much told women that their role is the family and they are not fit for military action. One interesting thing is he was not insulting in his tone, in those speeches he speaks to women as one would give advice to a younger sister or daughter. With love.
>>13627 >Of course the Aryans in societies with shitskins had to enact a stronger control on their women Refuted by the fact that the Greeks had sex segregation and literal burqas and didn't have a problem with non-Whites living in their society. >We see how the spirituality was perverted and degraded as time went by Stop listening to (((academics))), it never changed. They forced Vedic religion to fit a Judeo-Christian chronology and assigned dates at random for texts in order to make them younger than the Bible. The founders of the study of Hinduism were all Anglos who wanted to undermine the tradition and shill Christianity in India. >They think if a woman is not tied to the kitchen she will sleep with every man she finds, ignoring that if this were true it would indicate some serious issues with the men in that society that they are willing to jump at the opportunity of promiscuous sex. Women are naturally promiscuous if not kept in line by their menfolk. It's the same way that if you do not discipline and teach a child, they will act up and be spoiled.
>>13632 >cunny Cute and funny!
>>13630 You're an idiot who knows nothing. The population of the US in men is roughly 184 million today, in 1995 it was 132.5 million that study lists the proportion of men who said yes to attraction to a 14 year old is 95 percent, of this population is 71.2 percent Non-Hispanic White or roughly 95 million to get a proper representative sample with the standard confidence value of 95% with this population, with a 5% margin of error you would need a sample of 73 individuals to confirm that 95% of men, again are attracted to 14 year old girls the most, and that's not the only research that has been done on the matter either. I see 8 or 9 seperate studies in just the last two of his pictures.
>>13629 >Red-text and asshurt Holy fuck you're a massive sperg and faggot. >Your argument here is defeated by you here No it isn't are you dumb? >HOW DID THEIR SOCIETY GET THAT WAY, IF TACITUS IS COMPLETELY 100% CORRECT? I never said he was 100% you retard. Also Tacitus never acts as if he knew everything about them, just the things he admired about the Germanics during his time, such as their concern for purity and preserving their oldest traditions. He was admiring the recorded accounts written by his teachers and other guys he liked. We can only assume that they faced a better situation of dealing with their wives than any kingdom or empire. Still waiting for you to debunk what he said was wrong by your own BS. >The answer is DING DING DING rigid, unceasing, application of violence by men onto women. DING DING you're retarded, again Europeans and any ancient patriarchy did not need violence to tame women at all. This is your retarded delusion and the idea simply goes against human nature, because women will always naturally listen to men, unless they are environments that corrupt them (urbanism). But this is the same for males as well. > this does not mean or imply Abuse Yes it does you dumbass. Do you really think women will only listen to the most masculine and protective thing because of violence. It sounds to me that you yourself has never been around a woman and introverts to tell you how life works. Violence isn't needed until it is. >Yes they were, incredibly violent in comparison to even some of the harshest christian homes around, especially prior to the Second Punic War, which began their slow decline into a feminism nearly as horrible as today. Rome did not suffer a feminism or nearly as ours until after Augustus took over and establish the Roman Republic as an empire, and this was not because of the lack of beatings from Roman women, but because Hannibal sent his soldiers to kill every Roman male to destroy the SPQR's manpower. As a result, the females outnumbered the males within Rome and this lead to the influence of women within politics, due to the lack of men and their wives inheriting their husbands household. Although in the end whores were not allowed to become senators and completely control the empire's politics, only influence the minds of men and other women. This is was the fault of the state, and their lack of maneuverability to solve this issue before Caesar's triumph. Don't tell me that cuckcels are not orbiting here as well. >>13629 >One of the points in the big three post of Tacitus disavowing violence against women as niggerish(when it is not) Tacitus was talking about 24/7 abuse. Your entire post proves you are a brain-rotten nigger.
>>13630 Anon you're responding to cultural semites who LARP as hindpoos, they just want to fuck kids and beat women. Not solve problems wrong with Western society. >As you all know, women are a reflection of the men in their society. Right now women are promiscuous, irresponsible, acting against their own race. Look at most men, same story. That's another thing this retarded board continues to forget. If White women are degenerates, then so are White men and you faggots talking about banging little girls and posting anime shit are an example. Remember the reason why whores are increasing in numbers within America and Rome is because of men. Not to shit on us or to validify radfems, because they are a cancer. >I-i wanna save the White race! and then some of you proceed to jerk off and proclaim a cartoon as your waifu. You're aren't making the situation any better by crying about having no GF and continue to do absolutely nothing and wonder why the spooks can easily infiltrate our circles.
>>13642 >crying about pagans >crying about muh women >crying about wanting fertile women >crying about anime for no reason Yup, it's a Christian! Maybe even a female!
>>13643 >>crying about pagans Never did that, I mocked you guys for being Dharmic LARPers. >>crying about muh women Can you point where I did that? Oh wait you can't. >>crying about wanting fertile women Lol what? Are you admitting that you're a pedofaggot loser? Women over 18 are just as fertile, there's nothing stopping you from being with them loser. >>crying about anime for no reason I'm calling you niggers out for being hypocrites with anime. But, yes cuckime is shit and you're just proving my point here. You want women to make sacrifices for the dumb shit they invest in to save the White race and birth more children, but you aren't willingly to do the same. There is nothing wrong with criticizing a circle you're apart of, especially NEETsocs who are nothing, but all-talk degenerates who have never read the Mein Kampf or do not care about as much as the Germans did. >Yup, it's a Christian! Maybe even a female! No, but nice mental gymnastics there. I despise christcucks and want to enforce gender roles, don't know how you come to a conclusion from a post that does not prove I'm either of those things.
>>13644 >LARPers Shill buzzword. >Are you admitting that you're a pedofaggot loser? Wanting fertile women is the exact opposite of pedophilia, shill. >crying more about anime Classic shill tactic. >NEETsocs Shill term. >I despise christcucks and want to enforce gender roles You are a Christian female.
>>13641 Nice insults, wah redtext wah spergy Standard shill bullshit, the other guy is insane you're just childish. >No it isn't, you dumb? It literally is I logically proved your assertions and tacitus wrong by simple logical deduction, you assumed horrific abuse for no reason other than a false sense of superiority. >I never said he was 100% you retard. Also Tacitus never acts as if he knew everything about them, just the things he admired about the Germanics during his time, such as their concern for purity and preserving their oldest traditions. He was admiring the recorded accounts written by his teachers and other guys he liked. We can only assume that they faced a better situation of dealing with their wives than any kingdom or empire. Still waiting for you to debunk what he said was wrong by your own BS. You acted like he was infallible, it's been pointed out by other historians that Tacitus was likely referring to the age of the male at marriage not the female, women and their age so long as they had bled, never mattered. even if all of it's true which I doubt, it being a sympathetic viewpoint acquired secondhand it is likely more accurate than many other things but it is no gospel. >DING DING you're retarded, again Europeans and any ancient patriarchy did not need violence to tame women at all. DING DING you're even more retarded, Our ancestors literally have a very long and storied tradition of travelling and conquering and raping(kidnapping for slaves and warbrides) bitches but you ignore this and the modern definition of rape that absolutely occured on the regular with concubines and warbrides in droves, because you don't have the heart to do what's necessary. >This is your retarded delusion and the idea simply goes against human nature, because women will always naturally listen to men. Women do not, this is literally evidenced by advice as old as the Havamal, on top of every single rationally justifiable position indicating that women do not and will not without use of force stay in their place, it's no coincidence that as soon as force came off the table our society began to collapse. >unless they are environments that corrupt them (urbanism). But this is the same for males as well. Nope, and all the evidence I need to debunk you is to point again to the Havamal, to point out how there's "semitic thought" in even the best of our ancestors teachings who were anything but urbanites. >Yes it does you dumbass. No, it doesn't. >Do you really think women will only listen to the most masculine and protective thing because of violence. Literally yes, and you prove me right with your next argument. >It sounds to me that you yourself has never been around a woman and introverts to tell you how life works. I have a fiance, I speak to women on the regular as part of my job, you're absolutely off on that. >Rome did not suffer a feminism or nearly as ours until after Augustus took over and establish the Roman Republic as an empire, and this was not because of the lack of beatings from Roman women, but because Hannibal sent his soldiers to kill every Roman male to destroy the SPQR's manpower WHICH BEGAN THEIR SLOW DECLINE INTO A FEMINISM NEARLY AS HORRIBLE AS OURS TODAY and it would have been easily fixed by a few executions and some forceful husbandry, before this when bitches stepped out of line they were executed by the Pater Familias, quite often actually. >>13642 >Anon you're responding to cultural semites who LARP as hindpoos, they just want to fuck kids and beat women. Not solve problems wrong with Western society. Anon the cultural semite is you, a fucking reactionary, "Save the west" faggot. The only solution to this society's problems is to burn it to ashes and plant the seed of Yggdrasil in it's place. >If White women are degenerates, then so are White men and you faggots talking about banging little girls and posting anime shit are an example Noboidy said otherwise, and nobody has said anything about fucking 8 year olds besides you, one anon posted an excerpt from the Vedas, which is a quite well preserved( as the oral tradition still exists) Aryan Tradition even if it's in the hands of dravidians now who have obviously warped some aspects of it. >and then some of you proceed to jerk off and proclaim a cartoon as your waifu. You're aren't making the situation any better by crying about having no GF and continue to do absolutely nothing and wonder why the spooks can easily infiltrate our circles. Who on /fascist/ besides trolls and well intentioned degens has done any of this?
>>13643 I thought the same fucking thing.
>>13645 >Shill buzzword. <everything I don't like is a shill! It's the truth and you know it. >Wanting fertile women is the exact opposite of pedophilia, shill. Children aren't women. I don't want no kid, I want a adult woman who can take care of a household. You're just a pervert, admit it. >Classic shill tactic <shill shill shill What's makes one a shill for disliking anime? It serves no interest or purpose for fascism. >Shill buzzword >You are a Christian female You are a coping faggot, hell a Christian female is smarter than you with your non-arguments and clear asshurt. >>13646 >Nice insults, wah redtext wah spergy Your red-texts have nothing intelligent to say and it's quite clear that you want to emphasis your idiocy as something knowledgeable. >It literally is >I logically proved your assertions and tacitus wrong by simple logical deduction, you assumed horrific abuse for no reason other than a false sense of superiority. LMAO, we're dealing with a bunch of morons who think they're 180 IQ geniuses. No, no you did not brain-let, you proved nothing of the case that he was wrong, but that he could of been wrong and wrongly asserted that I thought he was 100% correct. >You acted like he was infallible, No I didn't you're an idiot. >it's been pointed out by other historians that Tacitus was likely referring to the age of the male at marriage not the female, women and their age so long as they had bled, never mattered. What historians pointed this out? If that's was the case, then there shouldn't be anything wrong with you taking Tacitus as a source of information if he was a pedopiller. >even if all of it's true which I doubt, it being a sympathetic viewpoint acquired secondhand it is likely more accurate than many other things but it is no gospel. But I didn't treat it as a gospel dumbass. I'm taking it as a source of information, because it is the few known written accounts of the Germanics. I'm not going to listen to some faggot on the internet who spergs out that you think men are better off woman who's over 16-18. >DING DING you're even more retarded, <N-no y-you! Pathetic response anon. >Our ancestors literally have a very long and storied tradition of travelling and conquering and raping(kidnapping for slaves and warbrides) bitches That's your assertion, we don't know shit our ancestors done, and even if they've done that it doesn't mean we should do the same you retarded loser. Aryans practiced self-control, because they knew shit like what you said was turning them into massive degenerates. May we came to remind ourselves on how this lead to Aryans cucking themselves out in India and Iran? As a matter of fact, I could only imagine a very scrawny nerd such as yourself failing to get anyone pregnant along with capturing women as warbrides. At best you're more suited for being a wage-slave who gets scraps at McDonalds than some fantasy warlord.
>>13643 that poster is a Christian female, there's no mistaking it. she's possibly a Leftist as well; given that she referred to "radfems" which likely means TERFs, or trans-exclusive radical feminists. that's a far-left term for women who reject traditional roles, but don't accept perverse eunuchs as women. in fact, the trans/terf divide is a major fault-line in our opponent's ideology.
Part 2/2 >>13649 >Women do not, this is literally evidenced by advice as old as the Havamal >Havamal You do realize that it specifically talks about how men should tame women by seducing them? How they are attracted to the most strong, wise, or rich males? As matter of fact you using that book proves my point. >Literally yes, and you prove me right with your next argument. No I did not, imagine trying beating women and this only leads to further civil unrest and as a result your entire society collapse, because you were heavily reliant on women. At least we know to keep you out of politics due to being a massive retard. >I have a fiance, I speak to women on the regular as part of my job, Sure you do, and you'll tell that you're also Conan the Barbarian and can easily conquering six gorillion females with your voice alone. At best you're probably what I insulted you with above. Tell your finance not to go too hard on your with the strap-on Mkay? >Anon the cultural semite is you, a fucking reactionary, Reactionaries are culturally semitic and they would agree with every thing you've said, so you have no point here other than being assmad. >"Save the west" faggot. But were was did I imply I was one of them?Anon are you even reading my post or just projecting hardcore, because you have no proper insults against me? > The only solution to this society's problems is to burn it to ashes and plant the seed of Yggdrasil in it's place. Yup and LARPers like you have to go for National Socialism to rise again. Niggers like you should burn as well. >Noboidy said otherwise, and nobody has said anything about fucking 8 year olds besides you, You sure about that? >>8932 >>13632 >>13637 >>13643 What dumbass you are, embarrassing, I wouldn't even allow you a honorable seppuku faggot. >one anon posted an excerpt from the Vedas, which is a quite well preserved And was used as an argument that you should be allowed to marry and fuck kids. >Marriage isn't sex!! Yes it is, morons. Marriage serves a purpose apart of sex. It's been this way since its creation. Being in unity with one includes sex, otherwise you have no reason to marry a child and can fuck off with this shillery. >Who on /fascist/ besides trolls and well intentioned degens has done any of this? Dude, you can go on the Japan, OC, and this thread. As a matter of fact the previous board suffered the same issue. >>13647 That's cute, you both should be butt buddies, since you enjoy being faggots together.
>>13650 >that poster is a Christian female, there's no mistaking it. If I'm a Christian female, then you losers are trannies NatSocs. By fact I'm better than both of you and less degenerate, because trannies and you losers share something in common.
>>13652 you're making a good effort, I'll give you that (eg your use of 'trannies' diverts attention from the fact that you're probably a Leftist mole). but when you're of a generation that grew up with internet, you get very good at reading ppl through text. there are all sorts of indicators, subconscious patterns and tells that show who you are irl. you are, without a doubt, an ornery female, and you're lashing out because you're not fulfilling your svadharma. this isn't entirely your fault, you grew up in a pozzed world that led you toward the fool's gold of being an "independent woman". you should be getting bred, preparing meals, and caring for young, as this is your biological imperative.
>>13646 People have, in fact, posted about being sexual with kids in this thread before. Not 14-year-olds; HALF of that. I am not saying you personally did that, but it's definitely happened before in this very thread. A lot of the previous discussion on it has been rightfully deleted. Having received replies just for warning of it cropping up again tells me the disgusting faggots who were posting it weeks ago still linger here. They can't even acknowledge the full message of the excerpt they themselves posted and instead fixate on the part that said "8 years" (of course they would), thinking that implies it was the norm. Age of consent is a valid topic of debate to some degree, but it often slips into very degenerative territory because of one-track pedophiles seeing it as an in. To reiterate, I never contested a reasonable age like 14. The last time this shit came up, 7 was specified. That's what I have a big problem with. Posters should refer to >>9700. To have been warned already about this line of conversation and yet seeing it (prepubescent marriage specifically) continue to be pushed shows there are people here with an obvious agenda. It is necessary to be firm and maintain a line in the sand. If pedophiles aren't dealt with, they will poz the website with their obsession. They have done so with other boards many times in the past.
>>13653 First of all I'm not a woman and you have no proof for this, but I'm wasting my time, because I'm giving (You)s responding to literal retards. Secondly >you should be getting bred, preparing meals, and caring for young, Now try saying this to a woman IRL and then see how hard you gay retards fail for them to see you as a man. As a matter of fact you niggers spouting dumb arguments within this very thread is proof that you have no chance of seducing a female so you have to go after children, likely because you are dysgenic freakshows. My post was calling you out on how no woman will ever listen to you if keep having this unrealistic and retarded perspectives and how men are in no better situation than women are, because they are either a numale or have muh dick niggerish behavior. It is a sign of weakness to force your perverted logic on woman instead of taming and having them acknowledge what they were made for by a mutual understanding between both spouses. None of you losers are worthy of having a good wife, and I couldn't blame a White woman rejecting you niggers when many of you had admitted to being Amerimutts on cafe. Your biological imperative should being less of a retard and not a low-IQ sperg who thinks that not wanting to rape women and children is only something that they would complain about. You're only making your enemies look good you imbeciles. You're all talk and no shit and can only be edgy on this board, cope more you fucking cuck.
>>13655 >First of all I'm not a woman and you have no proof for this it becomes more blatant with every post. as for the rest, somehow I knew that would set you off, kek. admittedly that came off condescending, but what I said is true. you came in here stirring the pot, so you set the tone; otherwise we could've had a civil discussion in spite of our differences. I'll agree on one point, men are affected by degeneracy too, but in a different way. that's because male and female are profoundly different temperaments, which are ultimately complementary.
>>13649 >Children aren't women. I don't want no kid, I want a adult woman who can take care of a household. You're just a pervert, admit it. But women are children, in comparison to any save the most degenerate man. >Your red-texts have nothing intelligent to say and it's quite clear that you want to emphasis your idiocy as something knowledgeable. Your entire posts have nothing intelligent in them, you are grasping at anything to point away from the solution to this societal issue, which is violence, no not beating your wife day in day out, just killing her when she steps far enough out of line, and many will, and punishing them to varying degrees of severity when they do less than is required for death. >No, no you did not brain-let, you proved nothing of the case that he was wrong Yes I did, the women treated with reverence he mentions are Volvas, and most of the rules are excepted them as they are blessed by the gods with foresight, nowhere does he explain this nor does he seem even aware of the concept, showing how distant the romans had fallen from their previous heights and how unrooted they had become. >No I didn't you're an idiot. You literally did, by implying the opposite of my position which was that Tacitus while seeming quite sympathetic had had NO first hand contact with Germans at all, which tells you he had no idea what was true and what wasn't, and he chose to paint a highly colored pleasant picture of a people he had never met who were chronic enemies of Rome, sounds kind of similar to leftist propaganda about how virtuous and moral niggers and all the other shitskins were prior to White mans arrival. that alone casts a huge amount of doubt to the accuracy of the account. >I'm not going to listen to some faggot on the internet who spergs out that you think men are better off woman who's over 16-18. I've never said that, anywhere, but men are better than women in pretty much every arena, even many of those that would be considered "Womens work" including raising of children, where single fathers are just slightly under that of a two parent household, where as single mothers are disgustingly deficient for the great "natural childraisers" they are supposed to be. as for best age of marriage, I maintain 14, so that she can grow into being a good wife and better learn her husbands preferences >Pathetic response anon. Yours was pathetic just returning it in kind. >That's your assertion, we don't know shit our ancestors done, and even if they've done that it doesn't mean we should do the same you retarded loser. No thats litrerally what the Proto-Hellenes and Proto-Romans, Aryan Conquerors of India, and more right on down to the Norse, and even the Scythian/Mongolian tribes of Aryans >Aryans practiced self-control, because they knew shit like what you said was turning them into massive degenerates. No they practiced self discipline because it was necessary to survive and dominate. >May we came to remind ourselves on how this lead to Aryans cucking themselves out in India and Iran? As a matter of fact, I could only imagine a very scrawny nerd such as yourself failing to get anyone pregnant along with capturing women as warbrides. I am in the prime of my life and in quite good shape, I got no worries about getting my Aryan warbrides. >At best you're more suited for being a wage-slave who gets scraps at McDonalds than some fantasy warlord. I work masonry for a living, quite well suited for warlording actually, I know how to build Fortifications out of Masonry.
>>13651 >You do realize that it specifically talks about how men should tame women by seducing them? You do realize that it doesn't actually do that, it instructs a man on how, but it doesn't judge or forbid concubinage or the practice of taking warbrides, which was done with aplomb among the germanic tribes, not usually within ones own community but the next tribe over, absolutely, it even remarked on in several histories that the norse had a surplus of men and would regularly send their sons off to war, and as it is quite well documented in england they did take warbrides quite often back home. >How they are attracted to the most strong, wise, or rich males? As matter of fact you using that book proves my point. Oh yes, it does note how women are shallow, and cannot be trusted but using it doesn't prove your point in the slightest. >No I did not, imagine trying beating women and this only leads to further civil unrest and as a result your entire society collapse, because you were heavily reliant on women. At least we know to keep you out of politics due to being a massive retard. Imagine that for a single second you don't argue like a woman( I know it's hard to do you being a woman and all) always assuming the absolute worst, nowhere have I advocated for abuse, merely the freedom of men to punish and end the lives of their property as it should be and was for all the great civilization creators throughout time women if they were actually in their proper place could never cause such a collapse. >Tell your finance not to go too hard on your with the strap-on Mkay? She laughed at your petty insults, you're really quite obviously a woman. >Reactionaries are culturally semitic and they would agree with every thing you've said, so you have no point here other than being assmad. No, actually the reactionaries all over the internet and in real life talk more like you than they do me. >But were was did I imply I was one of them? With your "not solve problems wrong with western society" rhetoric which I directly responded to. >Anon are you even reading my post or just projecting hardcore, because you have no proper insults against me? I am reading your posts quite well, and I don't engage in more than mild banter. >Yup and LARPers like you have to go for National Socialism to rise again. Niggers like you should burn as well. HEY WE GOT A RACE TRAITOR OVER HERE HANS GET THE FLAMETHROWER >You sure about that? was talking about the current conversation not 6 months ago, and none of the ones today said anything about fucking them, and one was a joke. >And was used as an argument that you should be allowed to marry and fuck kids. And while I disagree with less than 14 I will not stop a father from selling his daughter for a dowry younger than that, she belongs to him until she is married to another man. >And was used as an argument that you should be allowed to marry and fuck kids. To marry, marriage does necessiate sex at some point, but not necessarily immediately, and only a women would have so low an opinion of men that she would think we all want to fuck kids. >Dude, you can go on the Japan, OC, and this thread. As a matter of fact the previous board suffered the same issue. I've seen a few random anime pictures and some obvious shitposts, and artful use of ancient memes that are basically synonymous with image boards at this point, I see no problem.
>>13654 I know, FashBO, or are you one of the globals? I was here and we dealt with the issue. what i am referring to with that remark is in the current round of conversation, people have implied very youthful marriage yes, but none of them have gone any further as of yet.
>>13656 >it becomes more blatant with every post. It becomes more blantant that you are samefagging and have no nothing intelligent to say. >I'll agree on one point, men are affected by degeneracy too, but in a different way. that's because male and female are profoundly different temperaments No, they both face the same issues wrong with society today. Blaming everything on whores won't fix anything, because cumbrains or non-activists like you guys are also apart of the reason why they do it. >>13658 >But women are children, in comparison to any save the most degenerate man. Cope, men are just as dumb as and pathetic when they are degenerate. Look at the gays, trannies, niggers, spics, liberals etc as an example. I see no difference between them and any chick who whores herself. The fact that you cannot accept that degeneracy is bad for both gender is proof that you are naive and a child yourself. >Your entire posts have nothing intelligent in them you are grasping at anything to point away from the solution to this societal issue, which is violence, no not beating your wife day in day out, just killing her when she steps far enough out of line, and many will, and punishing them to varying degrees of severity when they do less than is required for death. >No you You shouldn't say that violence is an answer when you aren't anything to show niggers their place. Also you're wrong, this problem could of been solved if morons like you guys would realize your situation at hand. Women are like they, because men allow them to get away it with it (something you will refuse to truly understand). You can't deny this either, because you can look back at all the degenerate male feminist who advocated and groomed their students, wives and daughters into becoming total retards. Men and women are both what is wrong with society and your blame on them alone is something that homofascists think as well. You've yet to prove to me that violence is necessary for taming women. >You literally did, by implying the opposite of my position which was that Tacitus while seeming quite sympathetic had had NO first hand contact with Germans at all Because he was you absolute moron. You didn't read Germania did you? He relied on records of what they've done and how they lived and brought his own judgement and admirations about them. He had his criticisms, but he more certainly had more positive things to say. This was the same for Caesar as well, are you going to deny his accounts too?
>>13663 >which tells you he had no idea what was true and what wasn't Funny for you to say this. You hold no argument for why he was wrong. >and he chose to paint a highly colored pleasant picture of a people he had never met who were chronic enemies of Rome I like how you're proving yourself to be a nigger. I asked you what proved that he was wrong, and showed nothing that seems to be contradictory nor something that views them negatively as a whole, and yet you proceed to cry, bitch and moan on how he could of been wrong and not why he is. I have no reason to listen to a faggot over a guy who actually read his records and talked to historians on what they saw. Just admit that you personally do not like what was written, because it goes against what you believe. I don't have to meet niggers to know how they act, brain-let. >I've never said that, anywhere, No, but you are quite defensive over the fact that I'm against the idea. >but men are better than women in pretty much every arena Of course men will be better at women in arenas, because they are weaker. If you meant area, then this cannot be applied to a loser such as yourself, if anything you're just as weak and pathetic as a whore. >No thats litrerally what the Proto-Hellenes and Proto-Romans, Aryan Conquerors of India, and more right on down to the Norse, and even the Scythian/Mongolian tribes of Aryans You literally do not know what you're talking about. We don't even anything about the "protos". Funny that you have nothing but assertions to back your arguments lol. >No they practiced self discipline because it was necessary to survive and dominate. Man, you're a waste of time and braincells for me. Are you forgetting what Buddha, Plato, and the Rigveda warned to the Aryans on allowing your emotions and feelings to control you? You know the type of shit that warlords and bands aren't taught? On how to be marital without controlling their urges to focus on what truly matters? Our ancestors also went around killing and kidnapping random women out of pleasure and fun and this is what lead to mutts within India and Hellas today and many Aryans getting kicked out of their caste, which why Buddha created another practice to achieve enlighment. To survive and dominate means you must preserve your race and not become a lust addicted fool who views himself highly. Even Alexander knew this shit which is why he was able to rule the world, apparently it almost seems as if you're arguing against it. >I am in the prime of my life and in quite good shape, I got no worries about getting my Aryan warbrides. No you're a LARPer and the fact you used "Aryan warbrides" is proof of this and further proves that you are indeed a pervert who is nothing Dharmic in anyway. You're nothing special, just an all-talker and no-shittier. >I work masonry for a living Pfft, you think that's anything impressive? Again you're just a slave for the state. >quite well suited for warlording actually No it isn't, you literally nothing of war.
>>13661 >You do realize that it doesn't actually do that, it instructs a man on how, but it doesn't judge or forbid concubinage or the practice of taking warbrides, Holy shit, put down the soy, the vidya games and learn to go outside and learn what life is really like you literally retard. You call LARPing a buzzword and are consistently doing it. You aren't shit, shut up and find something that actually saves the White race. >Oh yes, it does note how women are shallow, and cannot be trusted but using it doesn't prove your point in the slightest. Oh? So you're soon to be bride is also shallow and be trusted? She will soon cuck you into oblivion for merely being a woman? You sound pathetic. No way you're getting a chick with this attitude. >Imagine that for a single second you don't argue like a woman Ah, so because I don't argue like a retard, I'm a woman? Is this finally a win for women for once? > nowhere have I advocated for abuse, merely the freedom of men to punish and end the lives of their property Dude, you just called them shit and said we needed violence, you did advocate this you're just too retarded to understand the meanings of words. You're a bore and it's clear I'm talking to someone below 70 IQ.
>>13665 >She laughed at your petty insults, <M-my imiginary girlfriend laugh at your post haha Dude, I've seen this type of post on /b/ on cuckchan, you're not fooling anyone kek. >No, actually the reactionaries all over the internet and in real life talk more like you than they do me. No reactionaries literally hate women. Again niggerbrain, niggerpost. >With your "not solve problems wrong with western society" rhetoric which I directly responded to. You don't see the issues the west faces with like you do in the East, which is why I said it. >I am reading your posts quite well, and I don't engage in more than mild banter. Nah, you're just dumb and a bore. >HEY WE GOT A RACE TRAITOR OVER HERE HANS GET THE FLAMETHROWER I strongly advocate White quality over quantity, if you get more quality Aryans over a loser who plays pretend on the internet as a warlord, then that's a win for us. >was talking about the current conversation not 6 months ago Maybe your dumbass should of been specific? Also read the posts lol, they aren't six months ago. The rest of your greentext is just proof that you're a newfag. Go look at the archive and I don't care what you want, because you don't matter at all. Incels are gay retards, if you unironically are one you should join percentage that you suffer with just like the troons do.
I would rather not butt into this conversation, but >>13661 >No, actually the reactionaries all over the internet and in real life talk more like you than they do me. You are not a fascist and you are not fooling anyone. Your politics are on par with the type of stuff that I've seen Bronze Age Perverts fanboys say on Twitter. Those guys are actually reactionaries, and literally hate women. Some are even anti-woman as a whole. So anon is right, you are reactionary. http://www.renegadetribune.com/red-ice-promotes-bronze-age-perverts-gynophobia-homoerotic-fantasy-of-masculinity/
>>13663 Cope, men are just as dumb as and pathetic when they are degenerate. Look at the gays, trannies, niggers, spics, liberals etc as an example. I see no difference between them and any chick who whores herself. The fact that you cannot accept that degeneracy is bad for both gender is proof that you are naive and a child yourself. Yes less than 5 percent of men are as degenerate as your average woman, good on you for figuring it out. >You shouldn't say that violence is an answer when you aren't anything to show niggers their place. Every time "you aren't doing anything", how do you know what I'm doing? you some kind of fed? >Women are like they, because men allow them to get away it with it (something you will refuse to truly understand). Yes, by not punishing the whores when they step out of line, I iterated this several times before now. >Men and women are both what is wrong with society and your blame on them alone is something that homofascists think as well. there's that woman attitude again assuming I'm blaming women alone, this thread is designed for discussion about women, should it be all friffy language to cool your raging cunt off? >Of course men will be better at women in arenas, because they are weaker. If you meant area, then this cannot be applied to a loser such as yourself, if anything you're just as weak and pathetic as a whore. Hi native english speaker here, go take another look at the definition of Arena see how there's more than one definition, which one might I be using? >You literally do not know what you're talking about. We don't even anything about the "protos". Funny that you have nothing but assertios to back your arguments lol. We know quite a bit about the tribes as they were forming, and conquering What became known as Hellas and Rome both, it may be more mytho-historical but Who We Are covers a good bit of the prehistory of both the Dorians, and the Romans, looks like you are the one who hasn't done the reading. >Are you forgetting what Buddha, Plato, and the Rigveda warned to the Aryans on allowing your emotions and feelings to control you? Nope, I'm not the one letting my emotions control me here and that'ss plainly obvious from your tone and egregious and ceaseless insults. >You're nothing special, just an all-talker and no-shittier. nothing but more baselsss assertions and insults, now you're getting boring. >you're just a slave for the state. I work on peoples houses, everything from chimney repair to a standard grindout tuckpoint, I avoid state work for a reason, even though it pays very very well, and I've got to get to system dropout somehow, we can't all be uber wealthy socially supported Germans now can we? No it isn't, you literally nothing of war. Actually it is, I know how to build walls, and fortifications for defense of a community Chimneys to allow people to warm their homes, walls for their houses so they may shelter from the wind and elements, sounds incredibly useful for a warlord to know to me. >Holy shit, put down the soy, the vidya games and learn to go outside and learn what life is really like you literally retard. You call LARPing a buzzword and are consistently doing it. You aren't shit, shut up and find something that actually saves the White race. Where'd I call larping a buzzword? and nothing but more insults and baseless assumptions, Othinn had 4 Concubines and a wife, all of them nice Aryan Aesir women.
bfe4e6 is the same guy who created the sigma male thread and tried to argue that niggers had more Ts than Whites.
>>13665 No way you're getting a chick with this attitude I already have mine because I know how to seduce a woman, I also know how to punish one(she likes it), so call it what you will I don't really care. >you did advocate this you're just too retarded to understand the meanings of words The language you're speaking is mine quit acting like you know it better than I do.
>>13669 Also he was LARPing in that thread as well, so do not take anything he says seriously, because he's a literal autist who lies to himself that "sigma" is real.
>>13669 >>13670 >>13672 Nope that was somebody entirely different, when BO gets on he can confirm, through admin tools but think whatever you will.
>>13673 You're a literal egotist and the the same guy who made said thread. Switching IPs won't disprove me wrong when you act same way he did. You are a reactionary and I agree with anons above, your politics are cringe and LARPy. It's literal >WE WUZ WARLORDS N SHIET You are mason and nothing else and can only act this way on a imageboard where you think you can freely be edgy. You clearly aren't the smart type.
>>13666 No reactionaries literally hate women. Again niggerbrain, niggerpost Nowhere have I expressed a hatred of women. try again, I have merely advocated for the sound positions of our ancestors, the ones who conquered and created civiliazations, in other words not you, my ancestors did though, all of them. >You don't see the issues the west faces with like you do in the East, which is why I said it. I see them better than you ever will, this society is lost irreparably and must be destroyed not only for our own survival but for the health of the planet. >I strongly advocate White quality over quantity, if you get more quality Aryans over a loser who plays pretend on the internet as a warlord, then that's a win for u No you don't, you argue for NRM and their bangup job, doing Nothing of merit whatsoever. >Maybe your dumbass should of been specific? Maybe you should pay attention to how that one post was literally months ago, I was here when it was posted.
>>13674 And here I thought my younger brother going to a warcraft LARP event was bad, kek. This thinks of everything as the movies, books, and vidya he has consumed.
>>13674 And here I thought my younger brother going to a warcraft LARP event was bad, kek. This thinks of everything as the movies, books, and vidya he has consumed.
>>13667 I never claimed to be a Fascist, a fascist puts that state primary, I'm a National Socialist, the race comes first, in all matters.
>>13677 >This thinks of everything as the movies, books, and vidya he has consumed. I'm talking like a retard now. >>13678 >I never claimed to be a Fascist, a fascist puts that state primary, I'm a National Socialist, the race comes first, in all matters. If anything you're really stupid newfag who doesn't know what National Socialism is, you're literal example of the type of WN who never read the Mein Kampf and think Hitler advocated a bunch of nonsense. NS is state first for the sake of race. It is fascist, read a book.
>>13678 >I never claimed to be a Fascist, a fascist puts that state primary, I'm a National Socialist, the race comes first, in all matters. You put perverted fantasies first over what we actually advocate. Secondly, National Socialism is fascism, fuck off back to /pol/ for this ignorant misunderstanding. Don't respond to me.
>>13679 >NS is state first for the sake of race. It is fascist, read a book. NS is race first, the state as a means to an end, and this is quite obvious from a reading of Mein Kampf, are you sure you know how to read? there are many things Hitler did that Mussolini never would have and just as many Mussolini did that Hitler wouldn't have. National Socialism and Fascism, have entirley different end goals even if the methods are similar.
>>13680 No, I'm simply reaching farther back for a more pure form of the truth, Why is it that women are literally treated as property in every way that implies, by all the civilization creating tribes? is it perhaps because violence is necessary to regain control of women gone wild? call it perverted all you want,k doesn't make it true.
(161.81 KB 639x480 retarded.png)
>>13681 >Mein Kampf, are you sure you know how to read? Thanks for confirming you've never read his book! He joined the German Worker's party and Mussolini got him into fascism. Read his fucking book you imbecile. Fascism covers race, Mussolini didn't want niggers in his party, only Italians. His fascism was more on the jewish question than race. >In those days I admit it openly I conceived the most profound admiration for that great man south of the Alps who, full of ardent love for his people, would not deal with the internal enemies of Italy, but pushed their anni-lhilation in every way and by all means. What will rank Mussolini among the great of this earth is the determi-nation not to share Italy with Marxism, but to save the fatherland from it by dooming internationalism to anni-hilation. Imagine being a subversive jew and trying to seperate NS from fascism. It's not an ideology that concerns only race.
>>13689 > His fascism was more on the jewish question than race To avoid confusion, I'm talking about National Socialism here.
>>13681 >NS is race first, the state as a means to an end, and this is quite obvious from a reading of Mein Kampf, are you sure you know how to read? Jesus, you are indeed a moron and are probably that annoying ancap who won't go away. The state represents the faces of our nation, you know the ethnos, people, race. It's not about state empowerment or centralization. It was born out of concern of the collective and the desire to enforce traditional hierarchy for the ethnos that monarchist, liberal democracy and communism has failed to protect. Your own post shot you in the foot and proves that you are indeed not a fascist, but are a racist liberal (not to use this word the same way nazbols do). Hitler loved Mussolini and, because of him it is why he took over Germany and created the NSDAP in the first place.
I’m not even sure how to begin moderating this mess
>>13697 You don't need to. Just allow the two spergs to keep their post up.
>>13655 >>you should be getting bred, preparing meals, and caring for young, >Now try saying this to a woman IRL and then see how hard you gay retards fail for them to see you as a man I would have zero issue saying this to a woman. It’s literally the main purpose of them on this planet. If they can’t cope with this, that is their problem, and due to the fact that the Jews have told them since birth that having a husband is evil, that caring for children limits their (((freedom))), and that caring for their family is horrible compared to serving Mr. Shekelberg
>>13702 >Now he's IP hopping No one cares, you won't say this IRL now. Anon is right, you are only an all-talker.
>>13703 >muh IP-hopping! The sign of a faggot with no arguments.
>>13704 I'm not trying to argue with you and you have nothing intelligent to argue with anyway, so it's a waste of my time. Funny you are not denying that you can only post, but never do what you preach. Also you have a (1) and won't stop derailing this thread like a faggot, you're obviously the same guy.
>>13705 I can though, and I have. But even if one did not, the truth value of a thing does not depend on whether it is expressed to others or not.
>>13706 >I can though, and I have You haven't and wouldn't been this board if you wuz a uberchad. Stop self-fellating yourself, Hitler warns Aryans on egotism and having a indiviualistic mindset. You are an anonymous poster, there is nothing that convinces me you're a big shot.
>>13707 I don’t care what you think, anon. It’s telling that you ignored the fact that something remains true regardless if said or unsaid, though–because that is what matters. You have a very feminine mindset and way of posting.
Also you probabaly are that loser ancap who tried to correlate statism as cuckoldry and talked about how much of imginary chad he was as well. Fuck off, your values are unrealistic and goes against fascism as a whole. Read the Mein Kampf and stop playing pretend online. Last post.
>>13711 >literally IP-hopped Lol
>>13709 >You have a very feminine mindset and way of posting. Masculinity is disciplined, reasonable, and where one is willing to accept truth. You are only weak and feminine one here. If you are a Dharamist you would know this.
>>13713 >willing to accept truth What truth?
>>13689 Thanks for confirming one mention of Fascism and one of Mussolini, are some kind of indicator that Fascism and National Socialism are the same thing and not that Hitler simply respected Mussolini's efforts even if it ultimately proved to be not what he thought when he wrote Mein Kampf. It's a shame that Hitler does not have any surviving diaries so we could perhaps see what he thought as Mussolini failed to account for the racial question adequately without pressure from Hitler and Germany, I would absolutely love to see what he thought of things as Mussolini seems to have made mistake after mistake after mistake, cooperating with jews who he deemed were loyal and of course, his utter failure of the Christian Question, which Hitlers government was quite open on despite making many mistakes in dealing with them. The mistake you and others seem to be making is that just because Hitler appreciated the early rise of Mussolini to power and perhaps some of the actions of the man against Marxism that he must have liked Fascism, or been for it. Oh absolutely there are ideas that Hitler thought were good about the theory of organization of the state, but how deep a discussion could he have had with Mussolini, not speaking any language ither than german? I suspect that he became more and more tired of covering for Mussolini mistakes, and of his public and rather embarrassing disagreements on the question of Nordicism and the absolutely unquestionable superiority of the Germanic race, literally shitting on our ancestors as illiterate and ironically bringing up The Nordic/Germanic men who ruled Rome at it's height to do so. His resistance to the racial policies he agreed to apply to his forces, and failure to punish the military men who did not enforce said rules particularly when it came to the jewish question. He seemed more admirable when it came to africans in ethiopia and when he was essentially a puppet under Hitler's control. National Socialism and Fascism are similar, but are by no means the same movement. And any such idea to that effect is seeking to "Big tent" all the various dissidents into one bug pool, faiking to realize how that has, every time, lead only to failure.
>>13718 That you aren't as big as you see yourself. This type of mentality is something women do. To me it seems that you have mommy issues.
>>13719 >Mussolini didn't cover race How many times do we have to debunk this for /pol/tards? Mussolini was for the ethnos, he was not bluepilled on race. Mussolini believed in Italian/western med supremacy and was silent on the jewish question, because he knew they had very powerful connections and could of lead to the social republic's downfall much sooner. Hitler never saw National Socialism as seperate as Mussolini and he specifically states that he was a major influence on his life. Sop trying to disunite us, because you niggers are too autistic on race.
>>13720 I an utterly convinced that you are a woman or a Jew at this point given your prediliction for psychoanalysis
(1.23 MB 690x460 disdain_for_plebs.png)
>>13719 > The Nordic/Germanic men who ruled Rome the what?
(63.40 KB 700x417 augustus roman emperor.jpg)
(114.39 KB 855x724 Roman emperors redpill.PNG)
>>13736 The Roman elite were Nordic. The patrician / pleb divide was partially racial in origin. Marriage was banned between these groups for much of Roman history, preventing further racial pollution of the patricians by the swarthier plebs. Greece was very similar. Many of their ancient kings had red hair and blue eyes, and many of the gods were blond-haired and blue eyed. Italians only became swarthy when Christianity took over and the Empire was overrun by barbarians.
>>13719 >He seemed more admirable when it came to africans in ethiopia Anyone can debunk this?
>>13738 The elite were definitely Aryan, but Nordic is a misnomer. The Italics were always had blonde hair and blue eyes! They themselves came from ancient Anatolia. It's only after interracial mixing did Italians become so brown.
>>13738 >the nordicfag is still here fucking cringe you amerimutts are truly fucked in the head >>13758 there is little to no "interracial mixing" in italians, including current italian population.
>>13724 >I an utterly convinced that you are a woman or a Jew at this point given your prediliction for psychoanalysis I'm convinced you are not White and are a Dharmic LARPer, because viewing yourself so highly than you actually are is adharmic. As matter of fact, it's something only women and anarchist. All you have are insults are coping that you are indeed a loser. Go to /pol/, I'm tired of you people shitting up every place you go to and lack any self-awareness that your mindsets are Judaic themselves. >>13772 That doesn't explain why Italians cline towards Ashkenazis.
>>13777 Also Italians do not look White and desecendants of Middle Eastern-like people They are mixed.
>>13772 >fucking cringe >you amerimutts are truly fucked in the head Angry Italian mutt detected. Come back when you can refute the evidence posted.
>>13772 maybe we are. maybe we should stop caring about Europe if you're gonna talk about us like that
>>13778 Italy is too large and diverse from north to south for them to be thought of as some monolithic race. If you imply that Sicilians are the same as northern Italians you're losing a lot of information.
(494.01 KB 422x598 couple.png)
(46.64 KB 400x600 06363742889429581.jpg)
I want to fatten up my wife because I'm horny what can go wrong.
>>14791 I want a neanderthal girlfriend to have lots of redheaded babies with.
>>13788 >those screenshots >evidence amerimutt education Stop projecting your racial insecurity on normal people, anon. Italians (most european people, actually) don't need a fucking ancestry DNA test performed by kike businesses to know they are 100% european and that their ancestors inhabited the same lands centuries, even millennia ago.
>>13788 Some Italians (usually in the north) look quite 1488. Those in the south can be Turk tier though. They are still European overall.
>>14791 >what can go wrong Nothing. It is a sign that you are high test. Getting a woman to look like the girl on the right is the most desirable outcome. Too fat is kinda degenerate in my eyes as it brings about health problems. Chubby / thicc is nice though. t. never been with a skinny girl in my life
>>13808 Northern Italians aren't that different from their Central and Southern counterparts. Italians are all about the same except for the Germanics who btfo'd the Roman empire and maintain their ancestors homogenuity after invading Italy. Your overrated country isn't that big nor diverse, they're just different breeds of oliveniggers and, Greekoids and tiny minority of Celts, Slavs, and Germans who barely make up a sigificant portion of the population. They are literally majority one race of mednigeroids. Stop sperging.
>>14794 >They are still European overall Nah, you could literally say the same about Ashkennazis because they are as European as they are.
>>14802 Italians are overwhelmingly compatible with the rest of Europeans, unlike Jews.
>>14802 Jews are GMO, or remnants of some proto-homindis like Neanderthals in the best case, you can't compare mixing with them to other scenarios. Italians are Europeans overall (although not all of them) and you can take your D&C elsewhere.
>>14805 Yeah you wish pastanigger, no way in hell would I mix race with a medcuck who's about as European as a mutt.
>>14806 >Jews are GMO, or remnants of some proto-homindis like Neanderthals in the best case, you can't compare mixing with them to other scenarios. This literally makes no sense at all. But thanks for proving that you don't know what a native European is retard.
(226.75 KB 1080x1249 1029984790867803.jpg)
(288.20 KB 1080x1440 1062909357575346.jpg)
(187.26 KB 1080x1440 1069954196870862.jpg)
(222.02 KB 1004x781 1060194364513512.jpg)
(42.58 KB 1052x736 1012326049300344.jpg)
GUYS I HAVE THE PROOF HERE THAT ITALIANS (pronounced eye-tal-yins) ARE WHITE.
(101.26 KB 1295x927 urnotwhite.png)
>>14828 >IP-hop Cope more.
>>14829 SHIEEEET WE WUZ WHITE But then proceeds to look like Arabs, lol.
>>14829 >What are dynamic IP addresses Even according to that graph Italians are closer to other Europeans than Jews are.
If you're too retarded to stay on-topic, go fuck off to somewhere they don't give a shit about derailment. Quit being a fag.
>>14831 >>What are dynamic IP addresses Yeah no, my IP rarely ever changes you're just hopping. >Even according to that graph Italians are closer to other Europeans than Jews are. No, according to the graph, Italians cline towards Southern Euros and Jews. But reminder that Southern niggers are at best only 40-60% native European. That's about as White as mutt or Ashkenazi to be more specific. >>14832 Suck my dick faggot.
>>14833 Your dainty father shoots garbage-cum blanks and your retarded ass is perfect evidence for that. You needed more ass beatings growing up, because without them you're now reduced to being an insufferable retard incapable of taking a hint and you expect everyone to put up with your shitposting. All that can fix you at this point is a lead pill through your feminized, silky-smooth brain. Keep screeching on the internet all day and wondering why everybody treats you like a severely autistic child.
>>14791 >>14798 Oh goodness I'm so horny I need an Aryan woman with ample waves and charismatic adipose to slam on my pelvis with her buttocks.
(602.48 KB 1570x2227 EJstmMIX0AEY8An.jpg)
Anyone who thinks that women in politics are right, is absolutely wrong. Women should be banned for politic's life
(265.02 KB 252x367 ClipboardImage.png)
>>14827 This man is literally indistinguishable from a Jew or an Arab. I cannot in good faith call large swathes of Italians White. If the term White is to have any definition at all, it must exclude swarthy figures such as this. I know this might anger Italians, but it is just the truth. The more of a Med that someone is, the closer they are to being a literal Arab.
>>14863 Most Italians don't look like that. And this belongs in the Italy thread not the women thread.
Oh ffs. >check out my cherry picked pics of Italians Anyone who falls for cherry picked pics is a moron. You determine what a nation looks like by looking at pictures of its soldiers. The army attracts a large swath of its underclass and gives a good cross section of what its people actually look like. It is not biased like cherry picked pictures. It is pure information. Here is what the Italian army looks like. What do you think? Do they look White to you? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulr3H4qciDw
>>14870 From this video it really does make them look a lot Whiter. I didn't watch every second of the video and jumped around though, but the dubious cases were pretty rare in here.
(54.29 KB 736x518 Hitler Checked.jpg)
>>14887 This is why army pic judging is the only proper way to judge the real ethnic composition of a nation. Anyone can cherry pick individuals of any nation to make any claim they want. Cherry picked images are totally meaningless. Using pics or videos of an urban center is also inaccurate since urban centers tend to be filled with foreign tourists and the worst of humanity anyway. Nor is it proper to use a picture of a nice village to prove anything since, again, this is often unrepresentative of the true population of the nation at large. The army on the otherhand is always composed of a wide spectrum of the lower class. >>14888 1488(8) checked
some women are good, others are bad, same as men. there is no reason to lump them all in one way or the other. women are different than men, yes, but they are also different from each other
>>14912 You're right but generalizations are also useful as long as you keep in mind their limitations. On the other hand, to completely dismiss generalizations on the basis of exceptions has you missing the forest for the trees.
>>14927 Says the delirious faggot who can't even stay on-topic and requests other men suck his cock. You're a fucking petty, spastic retard and it shines through every post you make.
(26.03 KB 650x488 Italian.jpg)
(275.65 KB 1688x1125 Man_Locks.jpg)
>>14840 >>14839 Fuck off you weebnigger cumbrains. This is why anime should be banned. >>14868 >most don't look like that A sigificant number of Italians do. Italy's most beautiful models from White(ish) to North Africanish or Arabic-like, while the general population look like a combination of MENA and Europoid. But hey, we nordicsts are in the wrong here despite seeing clear disapirites.
>>14929 I'm not the same guy and you have obessession with dicks. Grow some Ts and stop being a homofascist.
>>14931 You just deleted your post claiming that you were, fucking retard.
>>14932 Doesn't stop the fact that you can't stop thinking about other dude's penises you turbo faggot.
>>14936 >This thread is so autistic. All thanks to you, clueless dipshit. Pretty funny you're going on about how Italians are jews while subverting the thread topic and trying to hide anything incriminating. >>14937 You've made more mention of cocks than anybody else in this thread. Three times at the very least, so far. I haven't injected any homoerotic imagery into the conversation either, as you have by imagining me kissing other men. You sound gayer with every reply.
>>898 >What're anons thoughts on the place of women in a fascist world? I think that they should be held to traditional roles, but with husbands having full control over their wives. It would be best if women were to stay working as caretakers, nurses, assistants or stay at home mothers. I really don't see the reason to allow them to pursue a career, because females today seem too immature and idiotic to know what is best for them. This applies to some males as well, but I believe there are more rewards in educating males than females. No hate against any them or anything, but they clearly show to be too irresponsible and ignorant to ever be given rights. >>14939 >All thanks to you, clueless dipshit. You're not better, you're going full autismo mode over spergy and petty posts. Be quite and keep the thread on topic.

Delete
Report