Good discussion I'm involved in over on StormFront. It's in the open area, so you needn't be a member to post (as I understand).

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=137321&page=1&pp=10
====================
I've enjoyed very much reading the discussion between Grey Ghost and White Internationalist, having come to it near the end. May I throw in my view of the two of you from the outside? (Well, I guess I MAY, but I'd be interested in your comments -- either or both of you.)

Grey Ghost: The U.S. Army is no "tool" of any Jewish anything! Sorry Ghost, this is FLAT OUT wrong. Your loyalty to the Army is appropriate, but your lack of knowledge about that "civilian leadership" above you is HUGE. Keep researching, come awake! You are interesting in your "typically" military view of the world (I share it: I, too, served; albeit in peace -- and, after my awakening, I came to know that women should NOT be in the military). I share your passionate attachment to your men; I still have that attachment myself -- and snarl, wail, and rail against the terrible waste of our young men in jew wars.

WInter. has the right understanding that is IS a jew war (as have all wars been since at least WWI!), which the Ghost doesn't have.

Grey Ghost: I just always thought that I was doing what I did for my fellow Americans, and its just hard to accept that I was being lied to all this time. I mean, doesn't anyone appreciate what I did at all? Can't anyone see that I did it for the reasons I thought were right? Do you really think that I would have signed up if I thought I was going to be used for political and economical purposes? Been there, felt that! Can you learn to separate that your loyalty to your fellow soldiers was 100% correct, and your service IS appreciated; and that the (civilian) men sending you to war were liars and cheats? Your honorable actions were honorable in themselves -- that is, you were doing honorable things for the wrong reason to the wrong people. That makes you mistaken, NOT dishonorable! WInter is wrong in pounding you for doing what you thought was honorable -- NOW you know better! NOW you should no longer help the ZOG kill whites (or anyone else) unless they are actually INVADING our country! (None of this "imminent danger" crap!)

WInter. has that funny "all men have a higher nature" conception (sorry, WI -- no insult intended -- just my view) that is typical of foolish liberals who've been brainwashed by the jews into discarding their bone-deep understanding of the world. ONLY a society/tribe/civilization that has a strong warrior class who provide the protection of the "higher nature" folks (HNFs) can ever HAVE HNFs! If a society/tribe/civilization is busy trying to remain a society/tribe/civilization against outsiders, then they have no time for HNFs! HNFs are a drag, an impediment to their survival (especially when they try to restrain the warriors from the acts necessary for their very survival!).

Avalanche Aside: Women, generally, are HNFs -- and allowing them into positions of power is a detriment to their society/tribe/civilization. Instead of our natural nurturing tendencies being channeled into caring for our own tribe and children, we are allowed (by you men! :D ) to expand our view of "appropriate objects for nurturing" to include minorities, foreigners, and other undesirables. And so we vote to go adventuring to protect one tribe of africans against some other tribe of africans -- oh, I mean, "we" vote to SEND OUR OWN YOUNG MEN to protect one tribe or the other. Or to stop the "criminal" killings in some eastern European country -- this is where the Ghost gets it wrong: "criminal" is a matter for POLICE, not an army; especially not an army from some country half-way round the world! "Grey Ghost: I understand that they might have seen us as invaders, but in my opinion we were stopping them from committing any further criminal acts." We are NOT global police, it is NOT our business to either support or try to stop Milosevic or any other strongman doing whatever he wishes to his own people! It is OUR job to stop the people trying to do things to our OWN people!

Climbing down: Okay, this box is available for someone else now...

Back to "higher nature" folks (HNFs), which WInter. thinks we all are or can be.

White Internationalist: If the human race actually manages not to kill itself off first, it will eventually evolve to a point where truly human nature begins to dominate subhuman nature within the majority of people. Then neighbors will stop trying to dominate each other, preferring to cooperate in harmony. Neighbors will NEVER stop trying to dominate each other -- this idea is proof of your education in American schools. It is a basic, irresolvable economic problem that there will ALWAYS be a need for expansion. Star Trek :rolleyes: not withstanding, as long as human reproduce themselves, they will need to fight for more resources.

Envision this: a country of 1,000 acres. Each family has 100 acres. Each family has 4 sons and 4 daughters. Each daughter is sent out to marry some other family's son. Each son receives a wife from some other family. Even if we assume the parent generation then quits claim to their own land and lets their sons support them; each new family now has 25 acres. Each new family now has 4 sons and 4 daughters. Same trading around of children for marriage. NOW each newer family has 6 acres.

It doesn't matter how much your higher nature wants to cooperate in harmony -- SOMEONE must go hungry!! And the SMART ones will arm and take what's needful! (I keep as my motto:
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will PLOW for those who don't!)

This is NOT a solvable problem -- no technology will ever come into being that will "fix" it. Contraception won't do -- which family gets to have as many children as they want and which doesn't (China, anyone?) Better planting technology won't do -- you've STILL got to divvy up 6 acres into four plots for the next generation, and THEN what?

I tried to explain it to my ghandian pacifist (read: IDIOT!) sister and her husband: If there were a way to ensure that EVERY human born got a sufficient amount of food to survive (not to thrive, not to excel; merely to survive), *I* would take whatever action was needful to ensure MY children got more, got enough to thrive and excel. Does that mean someone else's children would starve? Yes, it does. So be it! MY children must thrive. And my sister says, "Oh no! She would NEVER cause other children to starve in order that hers might thrive!" And I point out: they would STILL have to band together with other like-minded fools, and arm themselves to protect their meagre portion from those of us who WOULD take food out of their child's mouth to feed our children!

White Internationalist: Until that time it is sadly true that we do need warriors. But isn't it ironic? We need warriors only because of other warriors. If there were no warriors at all we would not need warriors. Sheer foolishness.

White Internationalist: You can be a warrior on many levels. The physical is only one of them. But as a warrior your greatest responsibility is to make sure you're actually fighting the bad guys, and working with the good guys. Of course with everybody disagreeing and telling you contradictory things, it can get very confusing until you don't know who the good guys and bad guys are any more.
To help myself avoid such confusion, I resort to a very simple rule of thumb. Everybody can agree that little children are innocent. Therefore, anyone who knowingly harms innocent children is a bad guy.
Everything else can be reasoned out from that simple premise.
{sigh} A simple rule of thumb for a simplistic view of the world... It does not matter if we agree that little children are innocent. Since when does "innocence" have anything to do with anything?! The whole silliness of innocence implies a countervailing guilt -- so if children are innocent, are adults guilty? Is it okay to kill the guilty adults? What are they guilty of? This is the flaw in HNFs -- they have bought into a sense of evil and good (innocence); instead of recognizing that there is only bad and good. It's "bad" if a tornado sweeps in and kills some of your innocent children and your guilty adults, but it's NOT "evil"! Same thing if your neighbors -- those ones with only 6 acres per family -- sweep in and kill some of your innocent children and your guilty adults: it's BAD but not evil! (Nietzsche's slave morality: the little lamb thinks the bird of prey is "evil"; the bird of prey thinks the lamb is good, especially with some fava beans and Chianti! :D )

Ghost has bought into the slave morality too -- he thinks he's been off killing "evil" people. His leaders say: "these people are doing "evil" and so you must go kill them!" But the people his (other-designated) "enemies" are killing are no more evil than the ones he's protecting/they're being killed by.

I guess I'm sort of saying that "good" and "bad" are relative. You must declare your allegiance to whatever suits (I'd suggest family, race, culture, nation; NOT government!) and then everything falls into place from that. It is a tragedy that babies are starving in sudan, but it's NOT OUR PROBLEM! Our allegiance must be to OUR babies, and their best interests! So, Ghost going off and killing the fathers of babies in Serbia is just plain wrong -- not because one side or the other has "right" on it's side, but because it's wrong to endanger OUR fathers and babies on behalf of a group that is "not-Us." If the "not-Us" peoples are actually threatening us (Mexican border, anyone?), then action against them is "good."

HNFs like to believe that it IS possible for all people's interests to be served. They believe "if only" all people could become intelligent and well-meaning (like them :rolleyes: ), then everyone would get along...

Until the first couple of families have only 6 acres and four children to seat.

Wasn't it John Derbyshire of National Review who wrote that war is probably a thing of the past? We should be grateful to live in this era of great thinkers. ;)

The Ghost responded with a comment about warriors being a necessary evil, and I wrote:

No, warriors are NOT a necessary "evil" -- warriors are the ONLY thing that allows a tribe/society/civilization to SURVIVE! Our warriors have been subverted into the service of merchants and liars -- but that's a flaw in our system, NOT in our warriors!

If we had no warriors, our civilization would be over! Warriors are the sine qua non of survival! Be PROUD that you are a warrior! Be sorrowful that you were misused -- but warrior men are the ONLY thing that allows a civilization to continue! Now that you are awakened, you will be a warrior for your family, your race, your culture, and when the flag goes up, for your country! And think -- you will be an especially useful warrior because of your training and knowledge!

Let me get all whoo-whoo new-agey on you: all that you have undergone is what was NECESSARY to get you to where you are and who you are today! Do not castigate yourself for what you've done and learned; use those lessons for the future! (As you already have, by refusing to continue in the dishonorable actions of ZOG.) Make your lessons all the more useful by spreading your knowledge (carefully!) to others you know. You have a level of credibility with other warriors that, for instance, White Internationalist will NEVER have , so your words of education and awakening will carry much more weight!

The Gray Ghost said:
That being said, I'm not so sure that I'd be qualified to educate others to the true nature of our cause, as I feel I would surely fail miserably. I know that's not a proper attitude or response for a seasoned soldier, but we're not talking about warfare here. And I answered:
Ah but you see, you don't have to teach "the true nature of our cause" -- who CAN?! You are perfectly situated to teach about the true nature of the WARFARE we're involved in!

You can teach what you know -- "I was an honorable soldier, and I did what I THOUGHT my country was asking. After I had done things I would ONLY do for my own people, my own nation -- I discovered my nation has been taken over by a foreign oligarchy!" (Er, um, ... "taken over by a foreign tribe that has different goals than the goals of MY people!!" I USE the word oligarchy, cause my husband has taught it to me -- I NEVER used it before then, and if you asked me to explain all the ramifications and specifications of the word -- I'd look blank TOO!!)

Let me give you an example: MY main interest is in dating advice and mating/marriage advice -- that's where I spend most of my time (both here and away from StormFront), and I am working on completely non-racial unawakened lists and groups to gently and surreptitiously insinuate racialist information into dating advice and childrearing advice! I study prodigiously the books and advice on dating and mating -- and then address the flaws in the feminist ones, and push the ones (such as my perennial Pat Allen ) that recover women (and men) from feminism, race-mixing and destruction.

YOU have a solid experience in the military and in how military men think and feel. You know what their interests are, and you have credibility with them. So, YOUR mission (should you decide to accept it Mr Phelps... see I'm old, too!) is to become knowledgeable about how the military is used and misused for purposes not our own! Then you can begin to plant seeds in your brothers, getting THEM to start the same journey to awakening as you are now undergoing. No, you WON'T be able to teach them the whole system of undermining, subverting, and destroying our culture -- NO ONE could! But you WILL be able to teach them the comparative crime stats between blacks and whites (The Color of Crime -- google it -- if you haven't read it, DO SO!). You teach them the lies of the black congresscritter who is crying about how the high proportion of blacks in the voluntary military put blacks at unfair risk -- and how it turns out they're almost ALL not in combat units! And while you're at it, you teach them about women not being strong enough to throw a hand-grenade far enough away from the foxhole to NOT kill themselves and their crew mates -- and then teach how the whole "women in the military thing" got foisted on the services AND WHY! (And by WHOM!!! All together now: By the Jews!)

You, like Colonel Hackman, have credentials to present that kind of info to people in and out of the military --and be BELIEVED! YOU can go talk to liberals and ask them to justify why y'all were sent to kill or rescue some Bosnians and not others -- what possible justification can the libs have for their lies (and why are our soldiers still there -- 10 years later?!). You can carry around the numbers of killed and wounded in Iraq -- and a list of the LIES the neo-cons and their puppets and useful idiots used to stampede the U.S. into sacrificing OUR men and women for purposes not our own! You have the credibility to back up poor silly little Jessica Lynch -- the govt/military tried SO HARD to turn her into a hero; and she said 'wait, I was in a truck crash. I didn't fight off the enemy." And she disappeared from the media as useless to the (jewish/zionist/neo-con) cause!

AND you have the credibility to point out that the tortures at Abu Graib were textbook israeli tortures -- and the "contractors" who were supervising and playing along WERE ISRAELI or dual nationality! (No, we don't yet have hard evidence -- just bits and pieces... But hell, even that woman general in charge has let slip (now that they're trying to hang HER out to dry!) that there were israelis playing in her prison!

So no, you won't be teaching any grad level courses in history / sociology / politics and biology. Neither will I -- neither will "Svyatoslav_Igorevich, SDY6401, No 1965 Chain Immigrants, jack_boot, John Joy Tree, and MuaDib" -- they all ALSO concentrate on their own interests, and teach what they know best, and refer people with other interests to our people who share those interests!

I'm reminded of a lovely little Zen-ish tale:
This little bird is lying on his back in the road, with his feet stuck straight up. A horseman comes by and says, "What ARE you doing?!" The bird says, "Why, the sky is falling, and I'm holding it up!" The horseman scoffs, "What?! With those spindley little legs?" And the bird says, "Well, one does what one can."

We can all only do what we can. You've already shown you can do what is needful, with honor and commitment. And so you will do what you can (and no more) and what is needful. And that's enough. Yes?


He answered:

And for the record, there were several Mossad officers at Abu Ghraib during my last visit. I will say no more on the topic.

White Internationalist: All racial nationalism is a collective extension of people's individual egocentricity. Like other forms of egocentricity, it often wears an innocent mask when out of power. When in power the mask comes off and it is revealed to be essentially the same moral psychosis as Jewish racism, which is exemplified by the obscenely evil Talmud and by brutally evil Zionism. Black racial nationalism is Black Zionism. Hispanic racial nationalism is Hispanic Zionism. Asian racial nationalism is Asian Zionism. Arab racial nationalism is Arab Zionism. And White racial nationalism is White Zionism.

We all need to protect ourselves in every way from evil outside ourselves, and clearly that can never be accomplished by submitting to evil inside ourselves. When we refuse to be morally sane and face that simple fact, then terrible events force us to learn it the hard way.

Pathological egocentricity, both individual and collective, will never make the world a better place. It will only continue to feed the flames of hell, until it all ends in worldwide death and destruction.

Quite a sermon -- do you have a church building to go with it? :rolleyes:

I guess you didn't follow my attempts to differentiate between "evil" and bad? How is it "evil inside myself" (geez, where DO you get phrases like that?) to want to protect my family, my race (what Steve Sailor accurately described as: "A racial group is a partly inbred extended family." See his VDARE.COM article "It's All Relative: Putting Race in Its Proper Perspective.") from attack and destruction by some OTHER partly inbred extended family?

Oh, wait, if you preferentially take on the viewpoint of that OTHER family, then of COURSE actions to protect MY family will be "perceived" as evil. Why have you switched your loyalty from your OWN family to someone else's?

White racial nationalism is White Zionism.
And this is either plain foolish, or it's proof you haven't yet done your homework. Zionism is dedicated to, PREDicated on: Jews know what's best for the WORLD -- and "best" is that THEY rule over all the "goyim" (animals/cattle). ("A light unto all nations"! CRAP! They're lighting the path they've built for you to their abbatoir!) You okay with being a herd animal for their service? (I guess you ARE, since you support and defend them!) I'm not -- most of the folks here are NOT!

Most WNs do NOT insist that we "know what's best for the world" -- we insist we want to have our OWN place for our OWN partly inbred extended family! Think of our country as the "house" for our partly inbred extended family (let's go short -- and just call it RACE, okay? Can you remember race = partly inbred extended family?). We're saying we do NOT want people off the street coming in and setting up their camps in our living rooms, stealing our food and household goods, and attacking the members of OUR family who actually live in "our" house.

Most WNs don't really CARE what happens to the other races in their OWN "houses" -- if the africans in their own countries only know how to rape, torture, maim and kill... let 'em! (And it seems as if they DO only know that!)

Pathological egocentricity,
Can you define this? What makes it pathological? How does it differ from basic necessary egocentricity -- that drive in a human which forces him to eat, breath, and perhaps even reproduce? Is it only pathological if you switch your loyalty to some OTHER humans above your own? (That would be YOUR choice, right? We're saying: loyalty to our OWN race first; you're saying loyalty to any other human group before your own?)

You've been taught to protect and serve some OTHER family/race above your own. Have you thought that through, or do you just accept it as true? Who taught you that upsidedown preference?

When we refuse to be morally sane and face that simple fact, then terrible events force us to learn it the hard way.
Is it even worth it to try to deconstruct this sentence and identify the flaws in your premise(s)?

Morally sane: who is going to define BOTH these words? "Morally," as I said earlier, is a religious term, and you are accepting the 'given' (by whom, to what purpose?) definition of "moral." Is "moral" judgement-free? Is there a universal standard by which an action is moral or immoral? WHO sets that standard? And if we don't buy into it, is it because we're immoral, or because we don't accept as a valid source the people YOU have said get to set the standard?

Simple fact: I guess you're saying it's a "simple fact" that if we-all want to have our own judgement about what is and is not moral then we are evil. Circular reasoning, it it not? Can we disagree it's simple? Can we disagree it's a fact? You have made YOUR judgement about it -- WE judge it differently. Does that make us evil, again? (Does that mean you have "the One True Way"? Is it YOUR way, or someone else's? Did you work it out, or did you get taught it by someone else -- and to what purpose, or more accurately to WHOSE Purpose?!)

Terrible events: what terrrible events? The black-on-white crime (that the media pretends doesn't exist)? The massive immigration that results in white americans (that is, members of our partly inbred extended family) losing their jobs and homes and abilities to provide for their OWN family members? The degradation of our race's values in order to get us to wallow in some OTHER race's values? Are THESE things "evil" or good? (Who are they good for? Surely not OUR race?! Tell me again where your loyalty lies?)

Force us: well, we are surely being forced to learn about who is running our govt and for whose benefit... Ernst Zundel has now been in JAIL for more than a year and a half. Who benefits? David Duke gave up some of his freedom to protect his longer-term freedom. You can be JAILED for using racial slurs -- unless they're slurs directed at YOUR race (YOUR partly inbred extended family). It's ALLOWED to joke about rednecks or white trash -- but god help you if you talk about BLACK trash! (Who allows it? Who prohibits it? Why? Who benefits?)

Learn it the hard way: yeah, and you live in a black neighborhood why? Oh, so you CAN learn that they are just like you? Oh, wait... you DON'T live in a black neighborhood? Well now, why is that? Is it not "submitting to evil inside" YOURself to act as if there were a difference between WHITE neighberhood and black ones?

Avalanche1950, do you take LESSONS on how to be an ANNOYING POMPOUS TWIT? Or does it just come NATURALLY to you?

It's not just your playing stupid little games with my username and other people's names, nor only your irritating VERBAL TIC of putting every tenth word in CAPS, it's also the sheer pompousness of your presentation, the shallow flippancy used to express your revolting immorality.

Morally, you're as nearsighted as your cross-eyed cat avatar looks.

People don't need a baby-killing "warrior" class in order to live according to their higher nature. Good people don't need the dubious "protection" provided by evil people in order to be good people. For people to live according to their higher nature they need only the desire to do it. And they know it's better to die than live in an evil way.

Originally Posted by White internationalist: If the human race actually manages not to kill itself off first, it will eventually evolve to a point where truly human nature begins to dominate subhuman nature within the majority of people. Then neighbors will stop trying to dominate each other, preferring to cooperate in harmony.

Originally Posted by Avalanche1950: Back to "higher nature" folks (HNFs), which WInter. thinks we all are or can be.
Neighbors will NEVER stop trying to dominate each other - this idea is proof of your education in American schools.

No it is not. American schools don't teach anything like that, at least none that I ever went to. I wish they did teach that.

Originally Posted by Avalanche1950: ...as long as human reproduce themselves, they will need to fight for more resources.

No, as long as people with grossly immoral subhuman values continue to reproduce themselves, life on Earth will continue to be hell.

Originally Posted by Avalanche1950: I tried to explain it to my ghandian pacifist (read: IDIOT!) sister and her husband:
It is YOU who have a great deal to learn from your sister and her husband.

Originally Posted by Avalanche1950: If there were a way to ensure that EVERY human born got a sufficient amount of food to survive (not to thrive, not to excel; merely to survive), *I* would take whatever action was needful to ensure MY children got more, got enough to thrive and excel. Does that mean someone else's children would starve? Yes, it does. So be it!
You are truly an evil person, Avalanche1950. I feel very sorry for your poor children. You are the worst kind of parent, setting a grossly immoral example for them. You will teach your unfortunate kids to become evil like you.

It is evil people like you that make me absolutely determined to override my instinctive racial loyalty to my race. You are a total disgrace to the White race. When the White race has so many dirty people like you in it, that convinces me beyond the shadow of a doubt that my race no more deserves to survive than any other race. It is evil people like you that make me ashamed of my race.

And it is dirty evil people like you that absolutely guarantee that I will never decide to become a White nationalist. There are just too many lowlives like you infesting White nationalism, and you vile scum are fully accepted, when you should be totally condemned and cast out.

People like you prove to me that White nationalism is every bit as evil as Jewish Zionism, a haven for the most vile of people.

Originally Posted by Avalanche1950: MY children must thrive. And my sister says, "Oh no! She would NEVER cause other children to starve in order that hers might thrive!"

Your sister is a moral person. You, in stark contrast, are not. Which just goes to show, there's no gene for morality. It is people like you, in every race, who make this world into a hell.

Originally Posted by White internationalist: Until that time it is sadly true that we do need warriors. But isn't it ironic? We need warriors only because of other warriors. If there were no warriors at all we would not need warriors.
Originally Posted by Avalanche1950: Sheer foolishness.
No, it is sheer logic. Something that is over your head in this case.

Originally Posted by White internationalist: You can be a warrior on many levels. The physical is only one of them. But as a warrior your greatest responsibility is to make sure you're actually fighting the bad guys, and working with the good guys. Of course with everybody disagreeing and telling you contradictory things, it can get very confusing until you don't know who the good guys and bad guys are any more.
To help myself avoid such confusion, I resort to a very simple rule of thumb. Everybody can agree that little children are innocent. Therefore, anyone who knowingly harms innocent children is a bad guy.
Everything else can be reasoned out from that simple premise.

Originally Posted by Avalanche1950: {sigh} A simple rule of thumb for a simplistic view of the world... It does not matter if we agree that little children are innocent. Since when does "innocence" have anything to do with anything?!

What a hopeless moral idiot you are. The innocence of children has everything to do with everything. You are so sick, I think your children should be forcibly taken away from you and given to some moral White people.

Originally Posted by Avalanche1950: This is the flaw in HNFs - they have bought into a sense of evil and good (innocence); instead of recognizing that there is only bad and good. ...

(Nietzsche's slave morality: the little lamb thinks the bird of prey is "evil"; the bird of prey thinks the lamb is good, especially with some fava beans and Chianti! )
It figures that an evil creep like you would try to deny the reality of evil.

Originally Posted by Avalanche1950: It's "bad" if a tornado sweeps in and kills some of your innocent children and your guilty adults, but it's NOT "evil"! Same thing if your neighbors - those ones with only 6 acres per family? - sweep in and kill some of your innocent children and your guilty adults: it's BAD but not evil!

Pathetic twisted fool. That's easy for you to say if nobody is murdering your children. I'd like to hear you chirp like a moron "it's BAD but not evil!" if someone actually did murder your children. You are truly a psychopath.

Originally Posted by Avalanche1950: Why have you switched your loyalty from your OWN family to someone else's?
I haven't, you twisted deceiver. But I'll tell you something Avalanche1950, evil lowlife like you make it a lot easier for me to override my instinctive racial loyalty. Thanks for the help. You are a disgrace to the White race.

I've been around evil White people like you all my life, and that is why I will never be a White nationalist and I will never allow myself to be loyal to so foolish a thing as mere race. So I'm sure not going to replace loyalty to the White race with loyalty to some other damned race. They're all filled with people like you.

Originally Posted by Avalanche1950: Can you remember race = partly inbred extended family?
I wonder if inbreeding might be the explanation for you.

Originally Posted by Avalanche1950: Pathological egocentricity,
Can you define this? What makes it pathological?
Can you crack open a dictionary? Oh wait, no need. Just take a look in the mirror.

Egocentricity is pathological when, for instance, people loudly and obnoxiously boast sick things like this:
"If there were a way to ensure that EVERY human born got a sufficient amount of food to survive (not to thrive, not to excel; merely to survive), *I* would take whatever action was needful to ensure MY children got more, got enough to thrive and excel. Does that mean someone else's children would starve? Yes, it does. So be it!"

Avalanche1950, do you take LESSONS on how to be an ANNOYING POMPOUS TWIT? Or does it just come NATURALLY to you?

It's not just your playing stupid little games with my username and other people's names, nor only your irritating VERBAL TIC of putting every tenth word in CAPS, it's also the sheer pompousness of your presentation, the shallow flippancy used to express your revolting immorality. Well, the CAPS-thing is not intentionally an annoying *written* tic, but I haven’t yet found a sufficient/effective way to denote emphasis in forum messages. I’m sorry you found my abbreviating your user name annoying – I was trying to avoid calling you “WI” – which I find to be brusque and a bit rude. As you find it a problem, I will henceforward always use your FULL (oops! full) user name. I’ve never before been called pompous, but it’s a viewer’s call. If you would, try to replace the tone you hear in your head as pompous, with one that is earnest and a little anguished. That’s much closer to reality...

Morally, you're as nearsighted as your cross-eyed cat avatar looks. Yeah, he’s adorable, isn’t he? His username was Rico (short for Rococo).

People don't need a baby-killing "warrior" class in order to live according to their higher nature. Good people don't need the dubious "protection" provided by evil people in order to be good people. For people to live according to their higher nature they need only the desire to do it. And they know it's better to die than live in an evil way. Sure they do. (well the warrior part, not the baby-killing part! ) I’d refer you back to “olden days” – when a family would build a house out in the woods or plains miles and miles away from their neighbors. They needed to have or BE warriors in order to raise their children to adulthood. (And before you say it’s not like that today, what if you live in Detroit? How do you protect your children?) On the other hand, you seem to match my sister with her belief structure that finds it acceptable to ‘take a bullet for her beliefs.’ I find that morally nearsighted!

If you are a parent, you have a DUTY (sorry, caps necessary ) to remain alive to protect and provide for your kids. If that means your duty includes killing an attacker, what does your higher nature lead you to do?

Av: ...as long as human reproduce themselves, they will need to fight for more resources.
White internationalist: No, as long as people with grossly immoral subhuman values continue to reproduce themselves, life on Earth will continue to be hell.
So, um, how do you intend to stop those people from breeding you HNFs out of existence?

Av: If there were a way to ensure that EVERY human born got a sufficient amount of food to survive (not to thrive, not to excel; merely to survive), *I* would take whatever action was needful to ensure MY children got more, got enough to thrive and excel. Does that mean someone else's children would starve? Yes, it does. So be it!
White internationalist: You are truly an evil person, Avalanche1950. I feel very sorry for your poor children. You are the worst kind of parent, setting a grossly immoral example for them. You will teach your unfortunate kids to become evil like you. I disagree it’s immoral to take better care of MY children than of someone else’s children. There must be comparative values placed on everything and every person. I place a (much) higher value on MY children than on anyone else’s. My sisters' children come next. My cousins' children after that. My friends' children after that. If “every” child is equally valuable, then NO child has value (the problem of the commons, isn’t it?)

If there were a way to make sure all children were wanted and born to parents who would and could care for them to a standard I would wish (and you would wish too – we’re not disagreeing that children are valuable), I’m all for it. There IS no such way. There is no system of economic production, people management, technological development or another thing any of us can imagine that will result in all children being desired and cared for. The ONLY option would be “god” – and he hasn’t bothered to show up yet, so until he does – we’re on our own!

It is evil people like you that make me absolutely determined to override my instinctive racial loyalty to my race. You are a total disgrace to the White race. When the White race has so many dirty people like you in it, that convinces me beyond the shadow of a doubt that my race no more deserves to survive than any other race. It is evil people like you that make me ashamed of my race.
How do you go from disagreeing with ME – to hating your race? Does my attitude seem to you to be WORSE than those AIDS-spreading, baby-raping black animals in africa? How about the taliban shooting women in the head for laughing in public? How about forced abortion of 8-month-old babies in China? These are LESS objectionable to you than that the white race includes people whose opinions infuriate you? Shallow basis for a decision, eh?

And it is dirty evil people like you that absolutely guarantee that I will never decide to become a White nationalist. There are just too many lowlives like you infesting White nationalism, and you vile scum are fully accepted, when you should be totally condemned and cast out. People like you prove to me that White nationalism is every bit as evil as Jewish Zionism, a haven for the most vile of people.
You attachment to your race, your people cannot be very strong to begin with.

Av: MY children must thrive. And my sister says, "Oh no! She would NEVER cause other children to starve in order that hers might thrive!"
White internationalist: Your sister is a moral person. You, in stark contrast, are not. Which just goes to show, there's no gene for morality. It is people like you, in every race, who make this world into a hell.
Av: {sigh} A simple rule of thumb for a simplistic view of the world... It does not matter if we agree that little children are innocent. Since when does "innocence" have anything to do with anything?!
White internationalist: What a hopeless moral idiot you are. The innocence of children has everything to do with everything. You are so sick, I think your children should be forcibly taken away from you and given to some moral White people. Okay, so we know your emotional view of this... Now how about some rational discussion about it. If the “innocence of children has everything to do with everything” – tell me how that works in the real world. What is the “value” of innocence? Does that innocence protect them in any way? Is it only “guilty” children (if such a thing exists in your view) who are raped, maimed, tortured, killed by israeli bombs, raped by african males, or even killed by that non-evil tornado I mentioned? What protects the innocent? Their innocence? How does that have any effect? To protect innocence, you MUST have warriors. Or the non-innocent from across the border/down the block will destroy them.

It figures that an evil creep like you would try to deny the reality of evil.
Well, since you see evil in the world, you will surely see me as evil. I can live with that. But I don’t deny the reality of BAD – bad absolutely happens, and all too often to the unprotected innocent! What protects the innocent? And how?

Pathetic twisted fool. :D Back atcha! Okay, sorry; I know you're upset at what you percieve is my view of reality.

That's easy for you to say if nobody is murdering your children. I'd like to hear you chirp like a moron "it's BAD but not evil!" if someone actually did murder your children. You are truly a psychopath.
I would absolutely say it was BAD if my children were harmed. In order to prevent that possibility as completely as I can: I am armed, my husband is armed, we are WARRIORS! What protects your children?

My other sister (not the ghandian pacifist idiot, this one's a parlor pink; I think I come from weak stock! :D ) say if her son were threatened, she would throw herself tooth and nail, regardless of any danger to herself at whoever threatened him. I support that, to the extent it goes. But I cannot get her to consider that by preparing herself ahead of any attack, by making sure she knows how to EFFECTIVELY defend herself and her son, she is likely to have a much better chance of protecting him. She doesn’t want to think about ‘bad people” and the actual possibility of attack (and she lives in LA – talk about blind!), so she is not going to prepare herself to protect her son because it makes her uncomfortable.

Do you agree with her reasoning or mine?

Av: Why have you switched your loyalty from your OWN family to someone else's?
White internationalist: I haven't, you twisted deceiver. But I'll tell you something Avalanche1950, evil lowlife like you make it a lot easier for me to override my instinctive racial loyalty. Thanks for the help. You are a disgrace to the White race.

I've been around evil White people like you all my life, and that is why I will never be a White nationalist and I will never allow myself to be loyal to so foolish a thing as mere race. So I'm sure not going to replace loyalty to the White race with loyalty to some other damned race. They're all filled with people like you. Ah well, when you calm down, we can discuss this further? I think you are attributing to me all KINDS of things that do not logically follow from anything I have said.

White internationalist: Egocentricity is pathological when, for instance, people loudly and obnoxiously boast sick things like this:
Av: "If there were a way to ensure that EVERY human born got a sufficient amount of food to survive (not to thrive, not to excel; merely to survive), *I* would take whatever action was needful to ensure MY children got more, got enough to thrive and excel. Does that mean someone else's children would starve? Yes, it does. So be it!"
What is pathological about preferring my OWN children to someone else’s?

Just curious, what is HNF?

Just curious, what is HNF?

Why dont your read the article, you pompous Twit?

Back to “higher nature” folks (HNFs), which WInter. thinks we all are or can be.

No no Dr. *I* was elected the pompous twit! Are you trying to take away some of my honours?!

:p :D


Otto - I was TRYING not to call him what he is -- an idiot with delusions of grandeur... HNF was shorter than IWDOG. He got remoderated and then banned for insulting me... The moderators take a VERY dim view of "anti's" insulting white women! :cool: