Hexankghawktuah also made a textpost about how your actually a cuck for trying to uphold traditions which is LE IMPOSSIBLE because IT JUST IS, OKAY BIGOT?!
Hrmmm... someone who's anti-christian, wants a purely progressive & futurist yet racist society while also being connected to the nordics... this nigga is obviously FERD!
It shouldn’t be surprising since Hitler outlawed the German Fencing Mensur Fighting Clubs and was infamously mistrustful towards the traditional Prussian Aristocracy/Officer Class. Pilgrims Pass on YouTube has a great video called, “It’s not Fascism” where he discusses tradition, progress, and Fascism/National Socialism.
Good article. Honestly, I’m not interested in religious debates, especially in this current situation with mass immigration and decaying culture. Overall, I’m a race realist. I believe race is real and there are biological differences between different groups. But that doesn’t mean we have to be Hollywood villains and I don’t make race an idol to be worshipped. I put my faith in Christ.
Personally, I don’t think Christianity conflicts with putting your race first. I saw this one YouTube Comment that stated Christianity being a universal religion was a strength because it can be adapted by whatever culture embraces it. Christianity doesn’t look the same from region to region. I’ve seen pictures even of Jesus and Mary as Depicted as Korean and Chinese and of course there’s Celtic Christianity. And the beauty is that the adaptation doesn’t have to be inherently “woke”. Wokeness comes from an intentional twisting of church teachings not cultural adaptation.
I should also mention that the field of cybernetics is very broad and is not limited to robotics. They study systems, which include biological and social systems.
I didn't read the source of the quote but I'm fairly certain that this all boils down to is vs ought, how people distinguish between systems, and what they mean by purpose.
If you recall the telephone game that we played as children, the goal of the game was to transmitt a message from person A to person Z by relaying the message through a chain of people. We can consider this chain of people as a system.
From one perspective the purpose of this system is what it ought to do, and what it ought to do is transmit the message from person A to person Z, uncorrupted. Now, suppose that in this game there is a person in the chain who is uncooperative and always deliberately corrupts the message. A reasonable perspective to have would be to say that this system isn't doing what it ought to be doing and is therefore not fulfilling it's purpose. From this perspective the system purpose does not align with what it does. This perspective is a view that acknowledges what the ideal system ought to be doing (i.e., its purpose). We can call this the idealistic perspective.
A different perspective, which is also reasonable to have, is to acknowledge that the ideal system (there is no person intentionally corrupting the message) is a different system from the one where there is a person intentionally corrupting the ideal system. From this perspective, the system is doing exactly what it is supposed to be doing. Since the system has a corrupting component, the system will necessarily relay the corrupted message. This is it's purpose, since the corrupting person's purpose is to corrupt the message. This is a holistical perspective of the system that does not care about the what the ideal system is, if there even is one. We can refer to this as the holistic perspective.
I think both of these perspectives have their merits, but only in their respective contexts. Taking a Christian church as a system, which perspective should we take when asking what it's purpose is? The idealistic perspective would say that the Church as an ideal system would be adhering to God's decreed purpose of a Church described in the Bible. The holistic perspective would take the church as an ideal system (according to God) plus all of the corrupting forces acting upon it (internal and possible external, depending on the scope) and say that this system is carrying out its purpose, as it acknowledges the individual purposes of the corrupting parts of the system. From the perspextive of cybernetics, this holistic perspective may be fine, but in the context of this Substack post, the idealistic perspective is clearly what we want to be talking about.
"To them, answering in the former shows that you are not loyal to the White Race and answering to the latter shows you are not loyal to Christianity. It’s a catch 22 for them because they win no matter what."
I disagree. It's a useful way to see if people put religion over race. It's that simple. You'll notice that pagans are quick to say the correct answer. It's not about showing loyalty to religion, it's about showing loyalty to race. It's not a catch 22 for Christians to say the reverse, is it?
I don't think so. It's a good way to see where people stand. But good article anyways, just had this one gripe.
Except that's the problem. For one thing, Christians cannot put race over religion without being heretical. Pagans don't have this issue because they have a racial religion. That's why it's a catch 22. You can't answer either way as a Christian without loosing in the eyes of the Pagan.
I know Christians who disagree! Hence the discussions folks have about this subject! Of course, Christians don't agree on correct dogma, but I know some who are adamant the other races are beasts of the field, cursed by God, etc etc. They even have old church doctrine to back them up. Perhaps that would be a good discussion/debate for Christians to have amongst themselves?
I don't think it's losing to say White pagan Europe. I guess iFunny just has dicks on there. It's more of a juxtaposition and racial loyalty test. I do see where you are coming from, but I think there are other ways of looking at it.
Hexankghawktuah also made a textpost about how your actually a cuck for trying to uphold traditions which is LE IMPOSSIBLE because IT JUST IS, OKAY BIGOT?!
Hrmmm... someone who's anti-christian, wants a purely progressive & futurist yet racist society while also being connected to the nordics... this nigga is obviously FERD!
It shouldn’t be surprising since Hitler outlawed the German Fencing Mensur Fighting Clubs and was infamously mistrustful towards the traditional Prussian Aristocracy/Officer Class. Pilgrims Pass on YouTube has a great video called, “It’s not Fascism” where he discusses tradition, progress, and Fascism/National Socialism.
Good article. Honestly, I’m not interested in religious debates, especially in this current situation with mass immigration and decaying culture. Overall, I’m a race realist. I believe race is real and there are biological differences between different groups. But that doesn’t mean we have to be Hollywood villains and I don’t make race an idol to be worshipped. I put my faith in Christ.
Simply being willing to put race first while having faith in your religion is basically all that I ask. But it's hard for some folks
Personally, I don’t think Christianity conflicts with putting your race first. I saw this one YouTube Comment that stated Christianity being a universal religion was a strength because it can be adapted by whatever culture embraces it. Christianity doesn’t look the same from region to region. I’ve seen pictures even of Jesus and Mary as Depicted as Korean and Chinese and of course there’s Celtic Christianity. And the beauty is that the adaptation doesn’t have to be inherently “woke”. Wokeness comes from an intentional twisting of church teachings not cultural adaptation.
Peace
I can agree, I have Christian friends who are explicitly racialist, and I know more substackers, such as yourself!
I should also mention that the field of cybernetics is very broad and is not limited to robotics. They study systems, which include biological and social systems.
I hope this makes sense (I am sleepy):
I didn't read the source of the quote but I'm fairly certain that this all boils down to is vs ought, how people distinguish between systems, and what they mean by purpose.
If you recall the telephone game that we played as children, the goal of the game was to transmitt a message from person A to person Z by relaying the message through a chain of people. We can consider this chain of people as a system.
From one perspective the purpose of this system is what it ought to do, and what it ought to do is transmit the message from person A to person Z, uncorrupted. Now, suppose that in this game there is a person in the chain who is uncooperative and always deliberately corrupts the message. A reasonable perspective to have would be to say that this system isn't doing what it ought to be doing and is therefore not fulfilling it's purpose. From this perspective the system purpose does not align with what it does. This perspective is a view that acknowledges what the ideal system ought to be doing (i.e., its purpose). We can call this the idealistic perspective.
A different perspective, which is also reasonable to have, is to acknowledge that the ideal system (there is no person intentionally corrupting the message) is a different system from the one where there is a person intentionally corrupting the ideal system. From this perspective, the system is doing exactly what it is supposed to be doing. Since the system has a corrupting component, the system will necessarily relay the corrupted message. This is it's purpose, since the corrupting person's purpose is to corrupt the message. This is a holistical perspective of the system that does not care about the what the ideal system is, if there even is one. We can refer to this as the holistic perspective.
I think both of these perspectives have their merits, but only in their respective contexts. Taking a Christian church as a system, which perspective should we take when asking what it's purpose is? The idealistic perspective would say that the Church as an ideal system would be adhering to God's decreed purpose of a Church described in the Bible. The holistic perspective would take the church as an ideal system (according to God) plus all of the corrupting forces acting upon it (internal and possible external, depending on the scope) and say that this system is carrying out its purpose, as it acknowledges the individual purposes of the corrupting parts of the system. From the perspextive of cybernetics, this holistic perspective may be fine, but in the context of this Substack post, the idealistic perspective is clearly what we want to be talking about.
"To them, answering in the former shows that you are not loyal to the White Race and answering to the latter shows you are not loyal to Christianity. It’s a catch 22 for them because they win no matter what."
I disagree. It's a useful way to see if people put religion over race. It's that simple. You'll notice that pagans are quick to say the correct answer. It's not about showing loyalty to religion, it's about showing loyalty to race. It's not a catch 22 for Christians to say the reverse, is it?
I don't think so. It's a good way to see where people stand. But good article anyways, just had this one gripe.
Except that's the problem. For one thing, Christians cannot put race over religion without being heretical. Pagans don't have this issue because they have a racial religion. That's why it's a catch 22. You can't answer either way as a Christian without loosing in the eyes of the Pagan.
I know Christians who disagree! Hence the discussions folks have about this subject! Of course, Christians don't agree on correct dogma, but I know some who are adamant the other races are beasts of the field, cursed by God, etc etc. They even have old church doctrine to back them up. Perhaps that would be a good discussion/debate for Christians to have amongst themselves?
I don't think it's losing to say White pagan Europe. I guess iFunny just has dicks on there. It's more of a juxtaposition and racial loyalty test. I do see where you are coming from, but I think there are other ways of looking at it.
I don't consider Mormons to be Christian. I would also stand by the fact that you cannot put religion over race and be correct in this scenario.
Pagans can't do this either, but they don't have to because their religion and race are essentially the same.
Lol I didn't mean Mormons. I mean CI and positive Christians. To these guys, their race is also their religion.