Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
No bio...
User ID: 3132
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
21hr ago
Looking at the image, the femboy isn't particularly muscled or otherwise masculine asides from the flat chest, this is more like a 20-25%. Did you mean to link something else?
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
1d ago
Perhaps on a surface level, but even in the most progressive milieus "getting fucked" is understood as something to be suffered. The association of being sexually penetrated/femininity/weakness/inferiority still holds, just in a sublimated form.
I have never seen it used with the caveat just meaning bottoms.
See my flair.
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
1d ago
· Edited 19hr ago
The condemnation of active homosexual behavior is fundamentally removed from contempt towards gayness, as defined in my reply to @AmericanSaxeCoburgGothic above. The charge placed against the erastes isn't that he is personally weak or incapable, but that he defiles and corrupts the vulnerable; he may be a predator, but he's not a bitch.
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
1d ago
· Edited 22hr ago
I'm not talking about the technical, sterile definition of the word "gay", but rather the broader memetic associations that the word carries which everyone intuitively understands.
Consider this scenario: your sports team played against their rivals in the big game and utterly crushed them. In your celebration, you might say that your team fucked them, or blew them out, or made them your bitch. When one refers to a male as a "faggot", or by other coordinate terms, it degrades by asserting effeminacy—a proclamation that they are beneath you.
Per this association, mere homosexual behavior, or even a corresponding aversion to heterosexual behavior, is not "gay" per se. Gayness/faggotry, as a phenomenon with the above associations, is thus a particular subset of homosexual behavior which reflects a typically feminine constitution, including weakness and passivity unbecoming of a more capable type.
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
1d ago
Straight men are aroused by penises after all
This is an important point, and a reason why "likes dick" is not synonomous with "gay"; as a quick survey of pornography will show you, straight men love seeing big hard throbbing cocks(SFW).
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
2d ago
Because “gay” doesn’t really mean “male who fucks males”, but rather “male who is fucked by males”. For further reference, compare the coordinate terms poof, sissy, and faggot.
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
7d ago
The “BD” in HBD is Biodiversity, not Biological Determinism.
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
10d ago
As hydro said, the Amerindians were originally kept as separate as possible from the white American population. Amerindians weren't given unconditional birthright citizenship until 1924, and the reservations are still considered sovereign territory for their respective Indian nations. Later developments would take Indian policy in a more assimilationist direction, but that was mainly from a Christianizing perspective and not broadly miscegenatory.
The Australians went around massacring Aboriginals in an ad-hoc bottom-up way because it was easy but there was never any actual policy to get rid of them, the closest they got is 'the arc of history bends towards us, no big deal if they wither away but we won't actually make it happen, we'll do weird things like them away from their parents and raise them as our own'.
While there was no official policy of extermination, there was a considerable amount of more active efforts to expedite the withering process.
From Mark Twain's "Following The Equator":
Here is an instance. A squatter, whose station was surrounded by Blacks, whom he suspected to be hostile and from whom he feared an attack, parleyed with them from his house-door. He told them it was Christmas-time-a time at which all men, black or white, feasted; that there were flour, sugar-plums, good things in plenty in the store, and that he would make for them such a pudding as they never dreamed of-a great pudding of which all might eat and be filled. The Blacks listened and were lost. The pudding was made and distributed. Next morning there was howling in the camp, for it had been sweetened with sugar and arsenic!
The white man's spirit was right, but his method was wrong. His spirit was the spirit which the civilized white has always exhibited toward the savage, but the use of poison was a departure from custom. True, it was merely a technical departure, not a real one; still, it was a departure, and therefore a mistake, in my opinion. It was better, kinder, swifter, and much more humane than a number of the methods which have been sanctified by custom, but that does not justify its employment. That is, it does not wholly justify it.
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
10d ago
[ideas fundamentally, perhaps existentially hostile to the intersectional coalition] are common, [ideas fundamentally and existentially hostile to the intersectional coalition] are not
You see why they treat the two as equivalent?
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
10d ago
· Edited 10d ago
To the best of my knowledge, nobody was fired because of things they said about Charlie Kirk in leaked private messages. They were fired because they were in positions of trust (teacher, doctor, etc), and they posted horrific things endorsing his assassination publicly and proudly under their full name. These are not the same thing, don't pretend they are, I'm not playing along.
They are the same thing. Both of these situations reflect the same interior motivations, and insofar as feeling joy at Charlie Kirk's death is horrific, all of these people ought to have been punished. It makes sense from a practical perspective to punish only the highest profile cases as a warning to the rest, but the point was not to punish people for "saying things".
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
16d ago
Western societies in general suffer from a systems-level equivalent of an auto-immune disorder
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
16d ago
It is a perfectly reasonable observation to make that the features the Japanese (really, almost everyone) generally regard as "cute" have little in common with darker-skinned phenotypes. Darker-skinned populations have Noticed this for a long time, alongside related phenomena concerning group status, and take quite major offense to it. Despite the promise of equality given by the dismantling of explicitly discriminatory systems, these humiliating phenomena remain. Hence, it is not enough to be merely not-racist; one must be actively anti-racist.
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
18d ago
People who are afraid will self deport.
Illegals aren't afraid of being caught by ICE, they're afraid of having to leave America. The only illegals who will actually leave on their own are either rich enough to avoid the dysfunction of their home countries (in which case, they're probably not illegal) or so dirt-poor that it makes no difference. For the average Jose, living in America is such a massive increase to quality of life that he'll pay his life savings to smugglers for the chance to escape his shithole of origin[1].
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
18d ago
· Edited 18d ago
Do the people opposing ICE really believe that large scale unregulated immigration from Latin America will actually benefit the US?
It is precisely because the migrants' home countries are terrible that white progressives support them. After all, we can't blame them for wanting to escape poverty; in fact we have a duty to share our wealth, which we probably stole from them one way or another. White leftists believe that we're already so much better off than everyone else that to advocate for our own interest is disgustingly mercenary; all their other arguments for migration are downstream from this impetus.
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
20d ago
· Edited 19d ago
...what.
- A white supremacist would consider politics in a multiracial polity as a proxy race war.
- A white supremacist is by definition committed to the idea of their race deserving to reign supreme, so your criterion absolutely applies.
- To a white supremacist, white vs non-white is the most important division in politics, of course they do!
- ???
- Have you ever been exposed to any white supremacist memes? They talk a lot about "racial awakening" and "the Saxon learning to hate"—invoking passion is their primary form of praxis!
- ??????
- Refer to #2.
- Insofar as George Soros is a stand-in for influential actors/groups who promote anti-white causes, absolutely. What do you think they mean when they blame everything on (((them)))?
- ????????!?!
- This one isn't particularly characteristic of "conflict theory" at all, it can be framed from either a mistake (we just need to restrict lobbying more) or conflict (the rich will always have disproportionate influence in a democracy) perspective.
I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Edit: I just realized that the above list of criteria is ripped directly from Scott's original article on conflict vs. mistake theory. While the structure of your argument makes more sense with that context, it also makes the attempt to claim white supremacists aren't conflict theorists even more farcical:
Conflict theorists think racism is a conflict between races. White racists aren’t suffering from a cognitive bias, and they’re not mistaken about anything: they’re correct that white supremacy puts them on top, and hoping to stay there. Conflict theorists find narratives about racism useful because they help explain otherwise inexplicable alliances, like why working-class white people have allied with rich white capitalists.
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
22d ago
It's a belief that whites as a class as superior to other races as a class which requires an additional very important racial consciousness layer that is not necessarily present.
Civilizations can be considered as the cumulative efforts of a people/race "as a class".
That I'm closer to the center of a bellcurve of my race than my equally qualified colleague Milton is a curious bit of trivia that need not concern either of us.
It concerns your hypothetical colleague when women cross the street when they see him coming, when his kids stand out in the good schools he sends them too, when the criminals on the news always seem to look like him.
You'll note that I mentioned group dignity as a reason why non-whites/asians are understandably hostile towards HBD. I'm working on a post expounding on this at length, but for now I'll leave you with @hanikrummihundursvin's comment on a related thread:
[Humans] exist as biological entities. Genes expressed in an environment. We are a 'social animal'. We exist in groups. We interact with groups. You don't exist as an idea. You exist as a part of a greater whole. [...] I wish that the individual, reason driven, enlightened and fair minded people could understand and empathize with the emotion being displayed in the OP. Being part of a 'whole' that is in some ways lesser than another is a constant feeling of badness. The aforementioned minded, who want to rise above such silly emotions, or simply lack them, need to understand that they are a minority of a minority.
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
22d ago
· Edited 22d ago
"Interested in ruling me" would imply they take actions likely to make this happen. They mostly are interested in doing their own thing on the other side of the world.
What did you think jihad meant?
I, however, am not a European.
I meant "Europeans" as in whites. It is my observation that a critical mass of whites are congenitally inclined to believe that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere; the missionaries, the activists, the reformers, the revolutionaries. These impulses can and will be directed towards whatever ideological end is fashionable.
...My enemies are a threat because of their values, not because their values are a proxy for those of non-europeans/east asians. I am not worried about Africa or the middle east. I am worried about people who live in my country and don't want me to keep living in it.
Your enemies don't want you to keep living in your country because of the threat your values pose to the intersectional coalition, whose most powerful demographic are non-whites/asians. They believe that the things you believe are lower-order avatars of the same egregore whose purer incarnations included colonialism, patriarchy, homophobia, etc.; I think that they're more correct than you'd give them credit for.
Leaving other people to do as they wish elsewhere is simpler and both morally and physically safer.
You are correct. However, as I have established, I don't think that whites will be able to resist the allure of the Burden even if your side wins. To the extent that I wish they would take it up, it will likely be for misaimed motives and ineffective means, but a man can dream.
The only alternative is too horrible to detail.
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
22d ago
There's a bunch of Islamic extremists on the other side of the world. So long as they stay on the other side of the world, why should this be a problem to me? They are far away, they do not rule me, I have nothing particular to gain from ruling them. Why not just leave each other alone?
For one, they seem very interested in ruling you. While the progress they have made towards this end has been entirely thanks to sympathetic elements in your midst, before they were allowed to advance their agenda inside accepted bounds they quite infamously attempted to advance it outside accepted bounds.
It is true that you have little to gain from ruling them. However, you have plenty to gain from the $72.25 trillion in oil they possess (total value of Middle Eastern oil reserves, per ChatGPT), or any of the other resources they control, or simply the land they inhabit. You talk about how progress is a myth and how there is nothing new under the sun; why would you ignore the eternal appeal of conquest?
They should recognize that this is a bad idea and stop doing it.
A lot of black men would not be in prison right now had they simply realized that crime is a bad idea and they should stop doing it.
No one has a strong enough claim to moral clarity to impose their morality over the whole world, and if this is a thing people think needs to happen, I agree if and only if it's my morality being imposed. The flaws with this idea should be obvious enough that we can coordinate an end to the practice, even with a considerable amount of values-incoherence.
Europeans have not needed to coordinate with anyone other than themselves to impose morality for at least 500 years, and modulo China they still don't. To the extent that your enemies' values are a proxy for the values of non-Europeans/East Asians, the threat they pose is a paper tiger.
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
22d ago
If you believe in logic, then no, that is not the case.
1a. HBD posits that certain traits critical to functioning on an individual and civilizational level are substantially heritable. Further, it posits that these traits are most common/developed in Whites/Asians.
1b. White supremacy is belief in the superiority of White people over other races.
1c. Ergo, HBD substantially justifies White supremacy.
2a. HBD research uses scientific modes of inquiry, including logic and empirical evidence, to support its conclusions.
2b. HBD substantially justifies White supremacy.
2c. Ergo, logic and empirical evidence are tools of White supremacy.
But it's not the only thing keeping Liberia at bay. In fact, it's doing the exact opposite.
If Blacks and Whites are equal in their civilizational capacity, (insert the entire civil rights project here). If Blacks' civilizational capacity is substantially inferior to that of Whites, there is little reason to keep a large population of them in a White society; in fact, there is a strong incentive to kick them out of said society. Said Blacks would suffer greatly by being removed from the White society they inhabit, so they deny HBD and push their own counter-memes.
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
22d ago
I don't want to eliminate values I consider hostile to mine.
I find this hard to believe; it is expected that one might want to eliminate threats to oneself.
I just don't want to live near them, as that is just going to result in lots of conflict.
Separating oneself from the threat might be an acceptable substitute in a vacuum, but again I doubt that it will be a lasting solution; Europeans in particular have a habit of attempting to eliminate values that pose no threat to them but they consider repugnant. Consider the British Raj banning the practice of sati, or USAID funding feminist theater in Central America. Do you think your enemies' values are more like those of the Protestants or those of the Aztec?
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
23d ago
[modern academia] denigrating basic concepts like "logic" and "empirical evidence" as tools of White Supremacy
If you believe the truth of HBD, this claim is objectively correct.
if we could get good HBD research along with the nonsense critical theory "research," it would be a strict improvement, since it'd be helping to reduce the dilution of academia's truth discovery by the critical theory nonsense.
It is not in the short-term (or even medium-term) group interest of non-white groups to abandon the critical theory frame, even putting the matter of group dignity aside. If nonsense is the only thing keeping Liberia at bay, then nonsense shall be spread.
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
23d ago
Reply above is filtered, btw.
Eupraxia
Of all words spoken, all things read / most true was that which went unsaid
28d ago
...she's fine? Like I can normally see where female uglification complaints are coming from even when I disagree, but I have no idea what you're on about here, she's perfectly goonable as is. Is it the shadowing on her face making her features too angular or the bracelets accentuating her pointy elbows or what?
If you haven't yet completely flounced, would you mind posting what you found anyways? I'm working on something of a steelman of your and magicalkittycat's positions and I'd like to see what you managed to dig up.
More options
Context Copy link