← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · neoclassical

Miscegenation

Thread ID: 16863 | Posts: 6 | Started: 2005-02-21

Wayback Archive

neoclassical [OP]

2005-02-21 01:34 | User Profile

Miscegenation

The modern, rationalistic mindset is hilarious; it denies the obvious in favor of what is directly in front of the individual, right now. It does not do this in a healthy way, like nihilism, which then removes all external influences so one can actually see what's in front of them, but brings to the table all forms of preconception, the worst of which is the concept of justifying oneself to others. In this light, we can see that the "debate" over miscegenation is entirely hollow: it destroys the original race and replaces it with an unspecialized, cultureless mass.

Of course, the voices go up like a wall at this point: show us the proof. They want a scientific study showing that miscegenation is always bad for the individual, and has immediate negative consequences. A person of knowledge laughs at this; the greatest consequence, and judgment, comes beyond the life of the individual, over generations. It does not apply only to the individual, but to the civilization at large, and the group which sustains the individual, as well as the natural environment without which none of this would exist (modernity likes us to think the first human being evolved from apes in one stage, invented the microwave, and then the good times began). In short, judging by the individual, for the individual's life span, is to be ignorant of origins and destinations: history.

The best proof we can find, then, is history, and history is not "proof" in the modern sense, in that it is not intelligible to the entire crowd, or even the best thinkers when they are young; a useful guage of "young" used to be the age 18, but at this time, with knowledge being as broken down by popular opinion and marketing as it is, 27 is a more useful figure. The young live in a world of themselves, as they do not yet have families, or careers in which they must invest the rest of their lives because to disrupt that career path is to throw everything they have established into disequilibrium. For this reason, all but a handful of people are blind to history; this article will summarize and attempt to shout over the one-dimensional objections, but, dear reader, I encourage you to pursue this history for itself.

The ancients - Greece, Rome - relate that they were a people of white-blond hair with blue eyes, an assertion backed up by that of the ancient European works which we can decipher. They related that they co-existed with various other groups of dark-haired peoples, including some of dark skin, but that ultimately the two societies had different goals; the Indo-Europeans were idealists, and everyone else, whether through pragmatism or natural inclination (call that a "study question") were materialists, focused on stone or metal idols and the exchange of dollars in the marketplace. Their morality was that of not offending the group; the Indo-European morality was that of idealism, or doing not what was "right" but what was creative in the same way that evolution and thought are creative-selective processes, being that they first unboundedly create and next refine by throwing out the less-adapted and selecting the best.

Since these two beliefs were in collision when under the same roof, the two societies at first lived apart, the blonde Indo-Europeans keeping to their rules and the others, living as they had while the Indo-Europeans had struck out for the Arctic during the last ice age. Surviving in the arctic is no joke, as that is perhaps the most unforgiving climate on earth, second only to the desert, and it helped the Indo-Europeans select among themselves for those who could have long-term vision ("idealism") and the most assertive, commanding belief in doing what was creative and intelligent despite the circumstances that surround the individual. This mindset allowed the Indo-Europeans to create great civilizations in India, Rome, and Greece, and, if we are to believe local legend, the Americas and Asia as well.

Since that time, Europe has changed; it is now a nation where blonde/blue people are in the minority, as is any form of idealistic thought, having been replaced by the pragmatic liberalism of rationalism (which, if we look it squarely in the eye, is a secularized form of Christianity: the individual acting for personal interest according to the morality of getting along with the crowd) and of course, the materialism of industry and science as "goals in themselves." Consequently, its social fabric has changed from that of an assertive place where people do what is right for the whole, to a place ruled by greed, where people do what they can for themselves and do not trust the whole, nor the governments or people around them. When thought about for some time, in the context of its development over time greater than the individual, this can be seen as a disease; a breakdown; a lack of belief in life itself and its ways.

The only "proof" you need is within this: over time, Europe has changed its bloodline and its belief, and things are worse off for that, no matter how many cute toys and ways to congratulate ourselves for doing small things right that we have. The time has come to focus on the bigger picture, and in that, we see the failure of miscegenation: among other factors, and as a product of other factors, it has become part of the lives of our people and has turned their future from one of "ever upward" to one of finding the comfiest sofa, the best video games, and the most money; these are meaningless things when one contemplates the eternity of death, and what we could have been doing instead.

As miscegenation has increased, the fortunes of the Indo-European people have waned, and money and illusions designed to placate the drones have become the mainstay of our existence. Do the math. It isn't rocket science to see that, while the drones around you will cry for scientific studies, to a freely thinking and developed mind, miscegenation is death, much as money as a motivating factor and pleasing the self at the expense of the whole are. When you contemplate this, you can see the effects of miscegenation are destructive, and that this is all the "proof" that you need; the others know nothing, and are merely crying out in that hilarious modern mindset that passively demands an absolute reason, right now, for something that extends far beyond the now.

Having come this far, you see the failures of miscegenation, and see that it is linked to a society made by commerce and pleasing the crowd. You now have a nearly complete political statement, and a weapon against the disease of this time that covers the earth in concrete and turns us all into job-clocking, product-buying, television-watching drones: you wish to create a society that is not only the antithesis of the diseased one we have now, but one that overcomes the disease of this time, which is an intellectual one related to the modern mindset that makes miscegenation seem OK unless some hand of God tells you otherwise. Perhaps you have learned something, not just about miscegenation, but about the illusory thought of a modern society.

What must be done looks, at first glance, so large that it will defeat you by its very weight, but this is not so. Just as gradual change brought about our current error, it can bring us out of it, softly. Focus on your mind in the thought system that is not diseased as is the modern, and concentrate on what it is to think outside of the world of the drones; read the ancients, like Tacitus and Marcus Aurelius and Aristotle, and the moderns, like Nietzsche and Evola, and you will see what must be done. In everything that you do, act as if this is the future direction for society, as it is the only sensible one; gather around you others who still have brains outside of their televisions, and focus them on these ideas as well. Slowly we will change not only miscegenation, but the miscegenation of our collective minds, and will again strive for something meaningful.

Craig Smith (02/20/05)

[url]http://www.nazi.org/nazi/policy/miscegenation/[/url]

Petr

2005-02-21 01:57 | User Profile

[COLOR=Indigo][B][I] - "The ancients - Greece, Rome - relate that they were a people of white-blond hair with blue eyes, an assertion backed up by that of the ancient European works which we can decipher."[/I][/B][/COLOR]

Nordicist nonsense - has he ever taken a look at Greek vase paintings?

[COLOR=Indigo][I][B]- "Since that time, Europe has changed; it is now a nation where blonde/blue people are in the minority, as is any form of idealistic thought, having been replaced by the pragmatic liberalism of rationalism (which, if we look it squarely in the eye, is a secularized form of Christianity: the individual acting for personal interest according to the morality of getting along with the crowd) and of course, the materialism of industry and science as "goals in themselves.""[/B][/I][/COLOR]

More Nordicist fantasies, nostalgic ideas of ancients being somehow "idealistic" and ahistorical nonsense about Christianity - why, "[I]the morality of getting along with the crowd[/I]" was very typical to ancient cultures.

Petr

SCRIPTURESEZ

2005-02-21 02:18 | User Profile

[font=Arial][size=1]Jesus is for everyone and not according to skin color.[/size][/font]

[QUOTE=Petr][color=indigo] - "The ancients - Greece, Rome - relate that they were a people of white-blond hair with blue eyes, an assertion backed up by that of the ancient European works which we can decipher."[/color]

Nordicist nonsense - has he ever taken a look at Greek vase paintings?

[color=indigo]- "Since that time, Europe has changed; it is now a nation where blonde/blue people are in the minority, as is any form of idealistic thought, having been replaced by the pragmatic liberalism of rationalism (which, if we look it squarely in the eye, is a secularized form of Christianity: the individual acting for personal interest according to the morality of getting along with the crowd) and of course, the materialism of industry and science as "goals in themselves.""[/color]

More Nordicist fantasies, nostalgic ideas of ancients being somehow "idealistic" and ahistorical nonsense about Christianity - why, "the morality of getting along with the crowd" was very typical to ancient cultures.

Petr[/QUOTE]

RowdyRoddyPiper

2005-02-21 05:06 | User Profile

[QUOTE=SCRIPTURESEZ]But we should not be looking at greek art, much of it of nudes...[/QUOTE]

WTF??!? Are we supposed to avert our eyes from the works of Da Vinci or Michelangelo for the same reason?

Petr

2005-02-21 10:43 | User Profile

I'm beginning to to suspect that "Scripturesez" is really a troll known as Raina...

Petr

SCRIPTURESEZ

2005-02-21 13:41 | User Profile

Absolutely

In your heart, you know this is true. That is what the Lord says. Do not uncover anyones nakedness. This topic is covered in great detail in Leviticus and Deutoronomy and is said in so many different ways it is difficult to miss. Comes under the index of love your neighbor as yourself, do not commit adultery etc.

But you don't beleive, and this is exacly what the world bought for itself, the uncleaness of this age. Because people think that Jesus came and fulfilled the law and think he did away with the law so you can be safe and do what you like.

There is no scripture anywhere to support it.

And so you think you are free to do any wickedness and evil upon your neighbor.

One needs to remember that the works of the artists you mentioned is actually the commercial art of the day. The statue of King David is porn like porn everywhere. King David never danced naked before the Lord, that is nonsense. What he did was dance wearing the Ephod of the Lord, without his kingly robes on and that is what Saul's daughter was angry about. That he did not show proper kingly authority but humbled himself and danced for Joy before the Lord.

All these so called famous artists? They are nothing but the same junk that the greeks and romans were known for. Because the greco roman system is operating full blast and is in control of you.

We then with our hellenistic eyes look at the bible, we who don't know hebraic idioms of the day, mistranslate and misunderstand the words and the common meaning of the day. We are helped along in our misunderstanding by poor and misleading translations. That is why we need to study with an open mind the Word of God.

And Petr a reminder that if you knew the Scriptures, you just called The Holy and Annoited One a troll by the way.

Interesting note, a troll is pagan and is representation of a local demon of Norway and that area, but it has been introduced to the world and a cute toy and a national symbol. hasatan is a murderer and a father of lies from the beginning and has been in the business of decieving for quite a while.

Your adversary does not know everything, but He Knows Jesus is God and who are his saints and who is not.

[QUOTE=RowdyRoddyPiper]WTF??!? Are we supposed to avert our eyes from the works of Da Vinci or Michelangelo for the same reason?[/QUOTE]