The problem with the proposition of Betas going on strike

The most common response of Betas who first encounter the idea of Beta male identity politics is to withdraw support from the social structure which abandoned them. As a sentiment, this makes sense–choosing the altruistic option in a relationship where the other party is defecting makes you a cuck. But it’s also shortsighted for the same reason that ancap is autistic nonsense. Not only have huge swathes of men already defected from the current social order (MGTOW, NEETs, underemployment, academic underperformance, and the opioid epidemic are all examples), but the Belmont class has already responded to this defection by bringing in 3rd-world immigrants to replace white Betas. “You won’t fix my plumbing? Fine, I’ll hire two Squatemalans to do the job for half the cost!” And the Pyrrhic cycle follows its predictable trajectory. We’re already well past the “Beta defection” point in the cycle where a strike would at least be meaningful.

I keep telling people: the revealed preference of women and Alphas is for all women to share the top man in Squatemala, rather than settling for Beta monogamy in Rome. So the nuclear takeaway option is a delusion, because you can’t get monogamy by threatening to let the plumbing rust if the Alphas and women would rather keep their polygamy than keep their plumbing. The true power dynamic, and thus the only negotiating tactic that makes sense, is an alliance of an Alpha leader and his Beta followers, because that is the source of military strength and thus also the mortal salience stimuli which drives K-selection. In the long term, this is the strategy that will win. To rephrase this in terms that will stick in your head: The evolutionary purpose of indoor plumbing is enhanced military strength for group competition.

And that’s why we can’t actually go live in tree stumps, as much as you or I might want to. Like the neanderthals before us, you’ll just get annihilated by a soyboy sitting on the toilet, driving his drone from a smartphone while he takes an unofficial 30-minute break from work to shit. And when he watches the flash from the missile with a mix of glee and disgust, he’s going to laugh at you for being stupid enough to think anybody cared about your big takeaway.

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

76 Responses to The problem with the proposition of Betas going on strike

  1. mobiuswolf says:

    Hitler is our only hope?

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      The tribal sentiment behind Hitler, yes. In practice and according to the principle of extreme ownership, the measure of leadership is group outcomes. Regardless of your feelings about the man or the forces which opposed him, Hitler cannot be reasonably described as having succeeded in making the Germans great (again).

  2. kapy53 says:

    So how do we find such an alturistic alpha? Or must one of us become The Beta King?

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      It’s a matter of foresight. The smarter Alphas will begin to see the wisdom of tribalism sooner, and some Betas will see the power vacuum and rise to the occasion. The groups that form earliest will have better chances of surviving what the Glubb cycle predicts, because they’ll have longer to work out the kinks.

      The dumber Alphas will wait until all the plumbers are dead before he starts worrying about repairs. At that point, he’s gonna get droned in his walled garden.

      • kapy53 says:

        But how do we recognize him when he shows up and how do we join his tribe?

          • Alphas are retards. says:

            What about the sigma?

            • Aeoli Pera says:

              They’re irrelevant.

            • Alphas are retards says:

              >>They’re irrelevant

              How so? Alpha-Beta makes a brain that has its frontal lobes cleaved off appear in my mind. Deltas seem irrelevant if anything.

            • Aeoli Pera says:

              I’m using Beta in the original sense in the OP, not the Vox Day sense.

              Deltas are far from irrelevant–they are probably the most important factor. To assume the actions of the majority demographic in a population is irrelevant to the characteristic behavior of the population betrays a farcical understanding.

            • Brilliand says:

              At best, Sigmas might step up and accept the role of Alpha because they see the necessity. But… a Sigma is basically an Alpha without a group. If they take on a group, they’re not a Sigma anymore. If they don’t take on a group, they’re not much of a threat to the actual groups.

            • Aeoli Pera says:

              Right, the societal role of Sigmas, insofar as they can be said to have one at all, is disruption. A tribe built on a premise of disruption has no positive foundation, and a viable outbreak civilization must have positive prescriptions for behavior. There is also the matter of extreme rarity, which diminishes any significance they might still have to negligible impact.

            • Alphas are retards says:

              >>>Deltas are far from irrelevant–they are probably the most important factor.

              No they arent. Deltas are the biggest reason Feminism (Besides Alphas cucking and not destroying it literally overnight) is allowed to flourish. The Alphas and Betas could learn the Deltas skills with 6 months of Hands on Training.

              >>>Right, the societal role of Sigmas, insofar as they can be said to have one at all, is disruption.

              And after the disruption things are usually calmer and better. Sigmas are the autonomous Skunk Works of Civilization.

            • Aeoli Pera says:

              >The Alphas and Betas could learn the Deltas skills with 6 months of Hands on Training.

              The original Beta male identity politics post addressed this.

              >And after the disruption things are usually calmer and better.

              I didn’t know you were a communist. Perpetual revolution!

              >Sigmas are the autonomous Skunk Works of Civilization.

              Lol no.

            • Aeoli Pera says:

              I hate to be the one to break this to you but Ayn Rand was a Jew.

            • Alphas are retards. says:

              >>>I didn’t know you were a communist. Perpetual revolution!

              Not at all. Weve had Jet Aircraft since WW2 and Mass Produced Cars since the Model T. Wheres the fucking Base on Mars already?

            • Alphas are retards. says:

              >>>I hate to be the one to break this to you but Ayn Rand was a Jew.

              I know. What this proves is Feminism has been a problem for far longer than the Alphas want to admit.

  3. Fox says:

    Your theorizing would benefit from less of vox and manosphere SSH and more study of widespace thals and freeman fly’s “friendship agenda”.

    It is also kind of strange that you’re still thinking in terms of group competition (and especially “martial” group competition) when it comes to thals.
    The statements “does not engage in group competition”, “works alone” are so fitting they (especially the latter) might even be used to define a thal.
    The experience on various blogs and fora should make it perfectly clear that thallish people cannot form groups. Thals trying to ape saps is the wiggerest (and saddest) kind of wiggerism.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      And that’s exactly why the neanderthals were raped to death, and why the hybrid offspring of that unholy union have no place in the world. Things that make you go hmmm.

      • Fox says:

        The “orthodox” version is that melons felt threatened when a late thal type with larger group size appeared close to their borders (humbaba incident). Tex also mentioned that the late thals were quite arrogant.
        If you don’t want melons to unleash [enter apocalyptic scenario] on you, just don’t become a credible threat to them.

        Further, if you read the gilgamesh-epos, you’ll find that the “wild man” is being “civilized” by a whore – if this is a historical description, then wandering young adult neanderthals were mating with female saps/croms. The hybrids would be raised in the town, and their otherness and abilities wouldn’t go unnoticed. Likewise with the thal rejects who became guards. Both factors would lead to the creation of hybrid castes in melon societies – and those castes are badly needed for the logistics of the saps spear rush to work.

        The “saps mass genoc!de raep of neandethals”-idea itself should be questioned – I think the scenario outlined above describes the development of thal hybrids better, especially given that there apparently isn’t thal Y-dna nor mtDna left – the hybrids had thal Y-dna, saps mtDNA, and their male children formed a specialized celibate (or even eunich) warrior/guard caste (think janissaries), and/or were those doing the organizing work the melons are too lazy and the saps are too dumb for – celibate/eunuch bureaucrats (think mandarins).

        • Mycroft Jones says:

          Yeah, sapes women are total sluts, your scenario makes more sense than the older rape story. The rapes undoubtedly happened, but sex slaves don’t reproduce very much or very often.

          • Aeoli Pera says:

            The recent experience of black slavery in America suggests they reproduce fairly often but the offspring are only successful if they can backbreed into one of the original populations.

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              The black slaves who reproduced were like the Irish slaves (in Ireland), they were on plantations in sufficient numbers that they formed their own little ethnically homogenous communities. That is historically rare for slaves. When Israel was enslaved in Egypt, it was similar, they were in large enough pockets that they kept their identity (but still brought out a lot of mulatto children with them)

              So I’ll narrow it down; slaves in societies where slaves are atomized individuals in deracinated societies, don’t reproduce much. Even less than the free people in such societies.

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          The “why” of neanderthal extermination is irrelevant to the observation that they lost because they were massively outnumbered. My point here is the simple observation that if you keep doing what you’ve always done, you’ll keep getting the result you’ve been getting.

      • Fox says:

        Even if the orthodox scenario is correct and neanderthals had to suffer tremendously for not being able to form groups, the fact that they can not form groups because it is wholly alien to their essence remains.
        Trying to teach them to do it is as foolish as trying to teach math to a sape (or humility to a melon).
        Thus the only strategies available to thals are the non-group-centered ones (“individualistic”, or better: “independent”, strategies).

        Everyone has to develop his strengths the most (this is what everyone who ever played a RPG knows) – and for thals it’s independency and productive skill.

        • kensuimo says:

          I think Aeoli’s par precludes him from accepting that. Slight caveat: thals can do groups of up to ~10, which compared to the scales at Aeoli is thinking might as well be 1.

          Your comment above is appropriately skeptical, bravo.

          • Brilliand says:

            A group of 8 with one alpha would work quite well, I think.

            • Aeoli Pera says:

              That is even a bit higher than the optimal number, which is about 4 or 5 (cited in FightFailure but I can’t remember where–bakadesuyo maybe?). In a group of 8, an Alpha will want to have at least one Delta elevated to Beta status to act as a sergeant, and preferably two. Think Pareto distribution.

              That said, kensuimo is correct that I’m thinking on the large scale here. A group of 8 is not a viable breakout civilization, but there must be enough of these little groups to serve as building blocks which can be linked together.

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              If you think of 10 as the limit for mature patriarchal men, each one with one or more wives, and each wife with 5 or more children, now you have a group of 70. And that is starting to look like every successful Amish church plant or Jewish synagogue or Jehovah’s Witness kingdom Hall ever. And many other groups. This small size is the foundation of a little community that can grow and expand quite rapidly.

          • Fox says:

            Thals don’t form groups. Read the first post of “On croms”.

            “I think if learning math and humility are prerequisites to survival and reproduction, the sapes and melons who have sufficient aptitude will do it.”

            No they wouldn’t, because their response to stress is not problem-solving – and: The sapes who have sufficient aptitude aren’t sapes but hybrids, so such a process would change the thal-sapes gene balance in the population in favor of the former. Likewise, if competitive pressure is apllied to a thallish people that has some melon or crom in them, those traits will become more common – but this would not constitute a change of the thallish population, but a change away from the thal type in that population.
            i.e trying to save the thals the way you’re proposing is the surest way to destroy them.

            Thals are antifragile because they don’t even exist on the playing field called “competition” (neither on the intersocial nor the intrasocial half) – and this is why they fared better than the melons (you’ll find some people with more than half the occ the old thals had, but have you seen someone with even half the parietal the old melonheads had? It seems that thals are “less extinct” than melonheads).

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          I think if learning math and humility are prerequisites to survival and reproduction, the sapes and melons who have sufficient aptitude will do it.

    • bicebicebice says:

      “The experience on various blogs and fora should make it perfectly clear that thallish people cannot form groups.” 100% true, they form partnerships instead, where keeping the women and children more safe is more dead foreigners, the higher the kill count the more revered you are.

      This is why high-t croms and their paganism and little marauding gangs were so successfull at seizing but never holding until they converted to christianity.

  4. Mycroft Jones says:

    You’re still banging on about monogamy as if it was some kind of ideal, and polygamy as some kind of evil. Do you accept the Bible as a set of instructions for life and society, or not?

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      No, I don’t. The Bible is even less of a manual for life and society than the Aeneid.

      • Mycroft Jones says:

        My sarcasm filter isn’t the best. Where did that comment fall on the sarcasmometer?

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          I’m not being sarcastic. Why would a manual have poetry in it?

          • Mycroft Jones says:

            So oral cultures could transmit it faithfully through long centuries of mental darkness, so people could have access to the words before the advent of the printing press. Poetry is the hand-maiden of memory, and the hallmark of prophecy.

            • Aeoli Pera says:

              I’m not talking about oral tradition, I’m talking about poetry. What is the point of having poetry in the Bible?

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              Don’t be obtuse Aeoli. Poetry is oral. That is why there are poetry recitals. Tolkien’s poetry is great because he respected the oral nature of poetry.

            • Aeoli Pera says:

              Tolkien was not writing an instruction manual.

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              That doesn’t alter the original point, Aeoli. All prophecy was poetry. Poetry is how information was organized to be transmitted over time, because it assisted memory. We’ve only had the printing press for a few hundred years, almost all information transmission before then was oral.

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          More to the point, the Bible contains a great deal of ambiguity and requires lots of interpretation. It is thus a difficult book. A manual, on the other hand, must be direct and simple, with as little ambiguity as possible. Merely by perusing the book of Revelations, we could conclude that the Bible is a poorly written manual. But that’s absurd, because the Bible is characterized by extraordinary thematic organization. So poor writing is not a good explanation for the facts.

          • Mycroft Jones says:

            The ambiguity is in minor things. “Don’t commit adultery, and here are 30 examples of “adultery” such as incest and bestiality, isn’t ambiguous to me.

            Most manuals are not direct and simple; when you have a vast body of knowledge to transmit, you have to pack the knowledge together somehow, else all the books in the world won’t contain it.

            Let’s look at one famous manual, the Unix manual. The Unix manual was famous because it was shorter than the typical VMS manual. Or the IBM mainframe manuals. The Unix manual took up ten times more shelf space than the Bible.

            The Bible itself says “meditate on these words day and night”.

            The Bible is fractal in nature; you can see the outlines immediately; the more you study it, the more detailed and nuanced the picture gets. But the picture never changes appreciably. It just gets better and better. The amount of valid/true information packed into the Bible is by itself evidence of Divine inspiration.

            • Aeoli Pera says:

              >The ambiguity is in minor things.

              Explain how the book of Revelations has only minor ambiguities.

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              Show some ambiguous things in Revelation that have a major impact on your daily walk, and I’ll retract that statement.

            • Brilliand says:

              Ambiguous things wouldn’t have a major impact on his daily walk… they just get ignored, and the daily walk determined from less ambiguous things. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t major.

              Here’s something that *could* have a major impact on daily life, if it was less ambiguous: The mark of the beast. WTF is that? If Christians understood what was up with that, it might be something to carefully avoid. But as it is, most Christians just hope not to stumble across it.

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              If they are major, they wouldn’t be ambiguous, Brilliand. That goes back to the principles stated in Deuteronomy:

              Deuteronomy 30:11 For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off.

              Deuteronomy 30:19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set
              before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that
              both thou and thy seed may live:

              God gave us commandments that are clear enough to follow to His satisfaction. Nevertheless, there is enough intellectual meat to keep your mind occupied for life, so he commanded us to meditate on His words day and night:

              Deuteronomy 6
              1 Now these are the commandments, the statutes, and the judgments, which the
              Jehovah your God commanded to teach you, that ye might do them in the land whither
              ye go to possess it:
              2 That thou mightest fear the Jehovah thy God, to keep all his statutes and his
              commandments, which I command thee, thou, and thy son, and thy son’s son, all
              the days of thy life; and that thy days may be prolonged.
              3 Hear therefore, O Israel, and observe to do it; that it may be well with
              thee, and that ye may increase mightily, as the Jehovah God of thy fathers hath
              promised thee, in the land that floweth with milk and honey.
              4 Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God, Jehovah alone:
              5 And thou shalt love the Jehovah thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy
              soul, and with all thy might.
              6 And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart:
              7 And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt meditate on
              them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and
              when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.

              8 And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as
              frontlets between thine eyes.
              9 And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates.

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              Glad you brought up the Mark of the Beast, Brilliand. Anyone who obeys the Laws and Commandments of Jehovah knows exactly what the Mark of the Beast is. In fact, I just quoted Deuteronomy 6 in my last comment, not knowing you would post this. The answer is right there, in Deuteronomy 6:8. The Mark of the Beast is obedience to the Beast. It isn’t any technology. It is a matter of whose Law you follow. Do you follow Jehovah? Then we know it, because Jehovah gave specific Laws. If you don’t have it in your heart to obey Jehovah, then you have the Mark of the Beast. Many mysterious things in the New Testament become trivial when you listen to the words of Jesus who said:

              Luke 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither
              will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

              If any say they follow Jesus, but they ignore Moses and the prophets, then they are not followers of Jesus.

            • Aeoli Pera says:

              >The answer is right there, in Deuteronomy 6:8. The Mark of the Beast is obedience to the Beast.

              I rest my case regarding ambiguity regarding a major question.

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              You have no case to rest, Aeoli. The ambiguity is only for people who ignore the first five books. Read the Bible in order from the beginning, there is no ambiguity in anything that is important. It is like the kid who didn’t study for his math test and in fact, didn’t even listen in class, then says duh, 1+1 is ambiguous, how could any reasonable person come up with an answer to that?

            • Brilliand says:

              Mycroft, I think you are seriously distorting the “Mark of the Beast” passage in order to make it seem unimportant. The poetic language in Deuteronomy may explain why the mark is said to be on the “forehead or hand” (arguably – the wording is reminiscent, but it sounds less poetic in Revelation), but it doesn’t explain how “they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark”. Making it out to be the purely internal decision of whether to be obedient to Jehovah or not is quite a stretch, imo.

              You’re saying that that passage is “unambiguously” something quite unintuitive, and hard to see when looking directly at that passage; I’d say that clearly demonstrates ambiguity.

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              Brilliand, the Bible isn’t some puff novel where you can open to any page and pick up the plot. You have to start at the beginning, and then, like a martial art, practice what is preached. If you skip that step, then forget ambiguity; the whole thing is incomprehensible. You have to enter in through the proper gate or you will get burned. If you enter in through the proper gate, start with Genesis, read up through Deuteronomy, then you have the keys to the rest of the Bible. Then the rest of the Old Testament hammers the lessons home. Then you get to the New Testament. That is like jumping from arithmetic to trigonometry and calculus. If you don’t have the foundation, you will roll off into the weeds. Guaranteed. And so many Christians do. But if you have the foundation, the New Testament gently rolls along, affirming what was already written, tweaking and clarifying here and there, the differences being in emphasis rather than in substance.

            • Brilliand says:

              You’re not getting your interpretation from the text – you’re listening to your god, and getting what he wants to tell you.

              Since the “mark of the beast” passage is actually a mistake on his part – a “prophecy” that’s in grave danger of never happening because of Christians fighting against it, even though it’s only Jehovah who wants it to happen – he’s given you, and anyone else who will listen, a mundane interpretation that makes that passage seem unimportant.

              …never mind that the interpretation he gave you doesn’t fit what the words actually *say*.

            • glosoli says:


              I was just reading something, and it happened to quote Revelation, and it confirms your point about the mark of the beast:

              ‘Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands.’

              Worship it, receive its mark. Or not, the choice is ours.

        • glosoli says:

          Further reinforces my decision not to fellowship with you any more.

          Who died for mankind’s sins in the Aenid, who provided a set of laws and statutes?
          Some Greek guy I assume, I can’t remember the details from my school days.

          Good luck with your Aeneist faith.

          • Brilliand says:

            You and your purity spiral…

            Is there anyone left who you do trust?

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              He isn’t purity spiralling Brilliand. Glosoli has accepted a covenant that has explicit anti-purity-spiralling code built in. Churchianity is a purity-spiraling faith. The teachings of Christ are not. Any attempt to purity spiral makes you converge on the target, exactly where He wants you.

            • Brilliand says:

              Okay, so he’s in your fellowship at this point?

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              Fellowship is a broad term. I hold glosoli in higher regard than mere fellowship. Very few have the guts to read the Bible and just let it say what it says, and accept it without larding on a dumpster-full of Churchian excrement.

  5. Arakawa says:

    Today’s economy is increasingly being re-oriented to run on garbage as its main input. Why is that? Talented people are hard to raise and hard to find, have weird incomprehensible needs, and mistreating them is apt to make your corporation’s competitiveness plummet for no discernible reason. Garbage people produce output that is consistent and predictable garbage, and you can put them in a sexy-looking open plan office and whip them to produce more garbage faster. If you can build a competitive corporation on garbage, the gods of the market direct you to do that as your safest bet. Better pretend good craftsmanship is impossible than to deal with good craftsmen and their finicky demands.

    So if you withdraw your contribution from the economy and hope the economy misses you, either (a) your contribution was garbage in the first place and won’t be missed or (b) your contribution was talented and necessary in the short term, and some sociopath somewhere was scheming to find a way to replace it with garbage in the long term, because people like you are way too unpredictable and hard to fudge into the GDP model being used to show your nation to be the most economiest nation in the world so the real estate values stay propped up. Congratulations, you just made his job easier.

  6. fuzziewuzziebear says:

    While it is an interesting concept, I have seen too any stupid alphas that want to see it all degenerate to Squatemala. They derive pleasure from stabbing betas in the back and throwing them under the bus. Then, who will they delegate to change the light bulbs?
    The last time there was this deep a conflict between alphas and betas, it is presumed the betas took up stone tipped spears and imposed monogamy. Maybe it will come to that again. In the meanwhile, what you are asking for requires foresight and planning. These are not alpha traits.
    And, then again, maybe I have spent too much time in the manosphere.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      This behavior you’re observing is why empires collapse. It’s entirely expected. But there will be Alphas on the high end of responsibility for their demographic, by the nature of distributions. The question is whether there will be enough of them, and whether the average vision among them is sufficient, to form a breakout white American civilization.

      Hence my project.

      • fuzziewuzziebear says:

        I don’t see the well intentioned and forward thinking alphas coming to the fore. I see a bunch of greedy, smug, and conceited people cleaning up in the sexual marketplace.
        Then, I have spent too much time in the manosphere.

        The thought did occur to me that expatriation might be an option. America was built by immigrants, it can be taken down by men leaving.

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          >I don’t see the well intentioned and forward thinking alphas coming to the fore. I see a bunch of greedy, smug, and conceited people cleaning up in the sexual marketplace.

          The historical cycle suggests there will not be enough of them who wake up in time and we’ll be exterminated and replaced, as in Zimbabwe and South Africa. But they say history doesn’t repeat, it rhymes. So our fate isn’t set in stone, and pursuing a small chance is far better than no chance.

          >The thought did occur to me that expatriation might be an option. America was built by immigrants, it can be taken down by men leaving.

          If you run, I’d recommend going where there are already a lot of people like you and carving out a niche together from the host population. But I think you’ll find the expatriate personality a bit less amenable to this than you’re expecting. Or maybe you aren’t thinking in terms of viable grandkids who look like you.

          • kapy53 says:

            Well, knowing my families history of persecution in Switzerland and leaving for the New World, our best bet is probably colonizing Mars and becoming indentured servants to Elon Musk.

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              Leaving the earth isn’t, and never will be, an option.

            • Aeoli Pera says:

              I agree. Or at least, not a practical possibility in the foreseeable future for our species. It’s almost always an irresponsible pipe dream by people who are unwilling to tackle the immense problem of getting along with others.

          • fuzziewuzziebear says:

            All I can think in terms of at this time is how to respond as an individual. To overcome what is being thrown at us will require a collective response. I don’t know if that can happen. Part of it will look like men going to war with women.

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              Collective response can happen only if people turn their hearts to Jehovah, to renew the covenant and obey His laws. The Bible shows this many times. But without that fundamental basis, having a standard of right and wrong to return to, this repentance cannot happen.

              People can turn to other gods and other laws. But it will be brutal, nasty, and ultimately temporary.

            • Brilliand says:

              One evil to push people into another. Your quasi-Judaic Christianity is allied with those who are causing this problem – and yes, you’re immune to the problem because of it, but joining them is no way to defeat them.

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              For what cause do you call the Puritan faith “evil”, Brilliand? If the Bible is evil, then why bother mouthing the forms and appearances of Christianity at all? You state rightly that those of us who accept Jehovah, his covenants, statutes and commandments, are immune to Jewish evil. This doesn’t make us Jewish, or allied with the Jews. When the Jews do good, we treat them good. When they do evil, we do not tolerate it. But you have to know what evil is. If you try to punish a Jew for an evil that his God doesn’t agree is evil, then you are the one on the roasting rack.

            • Brilliand says:

              Well, I’m no Christian. The god of the Jews is evil, and I think Gentile Christians are foolish to worship him.

              I don’t expect to convince you of this – I just wanted to put an objection after your statement.

              (If you saw me “mouthing the forms and appearances of Christianity” – I do this a fair amount among Christians to make my arguments easy for them to understand, when the question of whether Christianity is right is beside the point.)

            • Mycroft Jones says:

              Thank you Brilliand for clarifying where you stand. Sorry for mistaking you for someone else.

          • Mycroft Jones says:

            Read the prophecies of the Seiner van Rensburg. He already foresaw all this 100 years ago. He foretold Nelson Mandela, President Obama, and President Trump in specific detail. His information is what you need to run. He also foretold the rise of the Alt-Right. And he also agrees with Aeoli that Generation Zyklon is NOT going to save us. After the Alt-Right takes over, some VERY heavy stuff is going to go down, almost (but not quite) extinction level stuff.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s