REPOST
Question:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Unfortunately for your bullshit argument, the Bene Israel originally had no experience with the Old Testament (‘The Bible’), or the Talmud, for that matter. Rabbinical Judaism did not exist for the Bene Israel. I am speaking of Judaism, which includes but is not limited to its sects. Your semantic game fails, and you concede this point. Your generalizations, then, are widely inaccurate, as they pay attention only to the details that you deem worthy – in other words, your willful ignorance of the Bene Israel is manifested not from your allmighty eagle’s eye, but from your predetermined bias. The Bene Israel practice Judaism (albeit it in a simpler form) – A Judaism sans Bible/Talmud. Your description of ‘Judaism’ does not fit the Bene Israel, so instead of accepting them as Jewish, you disregard them. Weak tactic.
my (limited) understanding of Bene Israel is that they have (up until recently) only kept the dietary practices and observance of the Sabbath. They had lost the language and beliefs of the Jewish people. They would not constitute as true Jews. They are merely nominal Jews. It’s kind of like saying Cradle of Filth is black metal. That is – the Bene Israel is only Jewish in the most superficial interpretation of the word. Total Death und ColdVoid uber alles! "The Holocaust never happened, and it should happen again." -Nizkor Project http://www.natvan.com/ http://www.resist.com/ http://www.whiteracist.com/ http://members.yoderanium.com/usa/index2.html/
Response:
1. Only a classless society can be truly stable. 2. Racism produces classes – historically, whites as the ruling class (economically and politically, and thus in a whole array of ways) and blacks as the servant class. It sounds like you are arguing to separate the races. My thoughts exactly.
I disagree with everything here, except #2, and my assent exists only in the limited context of western imperialism. —–Melvin Slundersloth—– http://www.Ihavenofuckingwebsite.com
Response:
1. Only a classless society can be truly stable. 2. Racism produces classes – historically, whites as the ruling
class (economically and politically, and thus in a whole array of ways) and blacks as the servant class. It sounds like you are arguing to separate the races. My thoughts exactly.
No. I am stating the historical facts regarding blacks and whites in America. Whites used the blacks for economic profit. Whites become relatively rich. Blacks become relatively poor. Classes are formed, generally along race lines. Class conflict —unstable society. I am not suggesting racial separation. I am arguing _against_ racism as it produces economic disparities between racial groups – simplified, there is a economic dichotomy that runs parallel along racial lines. When a (racist) government fails to provide housing, safety from toxins, fresh water, legal justice (etc) along CLASS LINES (which they do), they also do so along race lines. This is inherent in a racist system. In other words : The United States of America is one big welfare system for the rich, gained off the backs of the poor. (white and black) Previously, those backs were almost _exclusively_ black, so now almost anything seems justifiable by comparison. (Who cares if the child asthma rate in Hartford, CT is nearing 45%, at least those niggers got their freedom!1!!!). I think that stinks. ap
Response:
1. Only a classless society can be truly stable. 2. Racism produces classes – historically, whites as the ruling class (economically and politically, and thus in a whole array of ways) and blacks as the servant class. It sounds like you are arguing to separate the races.
My thoughts exactly.
Response:
1. Only a classless society can be truly stable. 2. Racism produces classes – historically, whites as the ruling class (economically and politically, and thus in a whole array of ways) and blacks as the servant class.
It sounds like you are arguing to separate the races.
Response:
6. You fail to show how fascism is independent from capitalism,
other than false claims of an anti-corporate Hitler – Hitler relied on international corporations. Because they knew he _needed_ them, they thus had power of him, and thus over the state government of Germany, and thus over the German populace, and thus over German culture (etc). Incorrect: Hitler spoke repeatedly against capitalism/communism
rule #1 : Hitler loved to lie. He also spoke repeatedly about a 1,000 year Reich. What’s your point? and dissolved German corporations that did not serve him.
American capitalism allows for the dissolution of corporations, as well. He may have dissolved disobedient _German_ corporations, but boy, did he love to do business with American ones! Hitler received and _gave_ help to the Aluminum Corporation of America (Alcoa); Alcoa is one of the biggest polluting organizations in the United States, next to the military (which is/was an ecological disaster, also thanks to Hitler). Alcoa choose to produce aluminum for the Nazis instead of the US because the German Government sucked more dick than did the American. Hint : Hitler encouraged and participated in corporate crime, and in the American capitalist deathmachine. He helped the stock market, thus helping the nation he was fighting and its bourgeosie. Further, government moved according to his plan *and public will*,
hence he was not autocratic and could not change all things in his government. A true Fuehrer guides public will. _Embodying_ public will is highly democratic, however. You have failed to address that argument before, and have failed to pay attention to extensive ideological arguments about why fascism is separate from capitalism.
You have failed to pay attention to where fascism is capitalistic, and where capitalism is fascistic. ap
Response:
Incorrect. Society as a whole uses guilt to control its population,
and currently those who are mixing race, denying racism and working against "classical white male-dominated Western society" are the favored ones – through guilt. Incorrect. Our white male-dominated society does not serve those opposed to white male-dominated society, except superficially/cosmetically. No matter how many ‘Martin Luther King’ days we have, blacks still live in the most toxic areas of the United States – and our white-dominated legislative bodies (How many black senators are there?) couldn’t care less. You just _think_ all the negroes and spics get everything they want because the media makes it seem that way, but as I said before, most of this ‘help’ is akin to putting a bandaid on a slit throat. Face facts: all of your arguments against national socialism have been moral ones based in GUILT and moral polarity. I take it you concede
this point as well, since you just fumbled badly. Hitler’s actions led to the deaths of 65 million White people – yet you bitch about the depopulation of whites….face the facts. Further, you haven’t been able to produce clear scientific evidence
that race doesn’t exist, nor have the other various flunkies wandering through here. They’ve produced studies which at first glance seem to address the issue, but fail upon analysis. You’ve failed to produce clear scientific evidence that race does exist, and does express itself in the forms you describe. Remember : I don’t have to produce evidence that prove scientifically that ‘race’ doesn’t exist, whereas you need to prove that race does exist, as your entire ideology revolves around this idea. The ‘divisions’ of mankind are not as severe as you think. Do you understand the concept of clines? Humans (separated humans, that is) are so _drastically_ far away (chronologically) from morphological development that would result in speciation that their achievement of even ‘race’ is doubtful. And this isn’t even taking into account the historical fact regarding the non-existence of a bottom-level gene flow – humans have moved and mated for much longer than you think. The status quo does not deny racial characteristics – you obviously
know nothing of the history of housing in the United States. You are attempting to hide the current time – the status quo – by focusing on distant history.
Incorrect. I was referring to the housing situation 100,50,20,1 years ago. Read again. Currently, the party line of corporation, government, church and
other institutions of social control is that race doesn’t exist. Incorrect. Does Affirmative Action represent this ‘no race!’ mentality? No. Big corporations are polluting (relatively) exclusively on the poor – the skin color of the poor is usually brown. Look at the HUD scandals. Corporate crime keeps the brutal cycle of poverty in motion (banking, housing, consumer crimes). The legal system is bent-over- backwards biased against blacks, study after study after study show. Church?! Who gives a fuck? Agree or disagree? Black skin devalues property. This may have nothing to do with racism.
And it may have everything to do with racism. Hunter S. Thompson has explained how this works. Concede. I am not pushing for change through guilt (about ‘inequality’,etc), but change through objective analysis of a rotten (and racist) system. Yet you can’t understand that whether or not this system is broken, another racist system might not be, hence you are using morality
against racism – which means you concede the first point brought up in this message. The US is a racist system, and it is broken. Why should I have faith in a new racist system when old racist systems have _always_ proven to be broken? Another racist system _might_ not be broken, but this is doubtful. I am not using morality against racism, but am saying that forced racial separation via military is not what I call a stable or ‘fixed’ system. Racism tends to cause instability, as it leads to a less superficially- and less media-covered instability, _economic schisms._ Some points : 1. Only a classless society can be truly stable. 2. Racism produces classes – historically, whites as the ruling class (economically and politically, and thus in a whole array of ways) and blacks as the servant class. 3. However, in regards to #1, I will admit that although a raceless society can be stable, racelessness is not _necessary_, and I never insinuated so in the past. I think the Ainu ought to control their own lands and lives – do you? If the White people can control their own lands and lives. Talk about Judeo-Christian Liberalism… Hypocrisy…yet AGAIN. Where is there hypocrisy above? If race separatism is encouraged, I support it for all races. That has nothing to do with liberal morality and everything to do with pragmatism.
1. I wasn’t referring to race-separatism regarding the Ainu. 2. If you support all races, you should _unconditionally_ support the stuggle of the Ainu. You explicitly stated a condition. See above. You are using morality in your arguments, hence you are defending it. You lost that point, and there’s no way to take it back. Comments?
I did not lose that point. Only a fascist/capitalist would, for example, want me to stop ’selling’ the idea that perhaps, say, the TRW Corporation should
be brutally eradicated. Fascism supports the death of TRW. Why do you feel a need to imply otherwise? Impossible. TRW _is_ fascism. TRW is not fascism; TRW is capitalism, which is morality. Fascism includes ideals TRW finds repugnant: environmentalism, racialism, classless societies and violence over profit.
Semantic games! – I did not say that Fascism is TRW. – I did say that TRW is fascism (or fascistic) – TRW does not include ideals that fascism finds repugnant – its fascist parts constitute a fascist whole, and nothing else. – TRW is thus fascism, or at best a fascistic tool of the capitalists. A fascist tactic. When the capitalists want to use fascism, they use the TRW. Do you want to assert that TRW is fascism again? You know my answer: you’re building a strawman based on a personal definition of fascism, and are *losing the debate* because you are accusing organizations
that share your logic system of being that which you argue against. TRW’s lack of representation of _every_ facet of ideal Fascism does not exclude the TRW from the categorization as Fascist. Please, this time address my points. The evasiveness has become rather tiresome. I have addressed all your points up till now, and invite you to prove otherwise.
1. You claim my ideas are not new. 2. I claim your ideas are not new (Nazism) 3. You ignored this point. 1. Tell me how TRW is not fascistic. See above; TRW is capitalistic.
It is pure fascist tyranny – within a capitalist system. – Capitalist systems are _prone_ to developing such (fascist) organizations. – Capitalist systems do not _mandate_ such organizations, as they are a relatively new advent – a product of technological modernity. Here’s my comment: If the White people can control their own lands and lives. It’s a conditional. The White races exist, and many have been
oppressed and are currently oppressed. Oppression/genocide of indigenous peoples should stop; White races are indigenous peoples also, native to Europe. "White races" don’t all live in Europe. "White races" are not living indigenous lives. There are two types of peoples in this world : technological peoples and non-technological peoples. Technological peoples hardly qualify as ‘indigenous’. The conditional is unecessary. Although you should desire the ‘liberation of the white man’ (if that’s what you think he needs), your opinions regarding other indigenous peoples should not rest on this condition. 3. You fail to prove anything regarding the ‘ugliness’ of ‘racially- mixed’ individuals. 4. You fail to prove anything regarding the ’stupidity’
of ‘racially- mixed’ individuals. There is no data on the subject either way, since it is taboo to
study, but I have pointed to many reasons why the unbalanced nature of racially mixed individuals is evident, and many people throughout history – and social/ethnic trends – which support that idea. You have failed to address my counterarguments, or provide contrary data, hence you concede the point. Nice try. You have not provided anything. Tell me about these ‘many people throughout history’, please. 5. You fail to show how fascism supports indigenous (non-technological) peoples. I do not intend to. Fascism (racial separatism + race nationalism) supports each race that implements it. It is your morality talking
that wants me to run around the world after indigenous peoples. You are evading. It supports each race that implements it, yes, but you are insinuating that it _doesn’t affect_ the races that didn’t implement it! You are claiming that other races would not be affected. In other words, on one hand you are saying that "If I’m Fuehrer, I’d preserve all races via separation!" and on the other you are saying "Indigenous peoples? I will have _nothing_ do to with them! Morality wants me to run around and "help ‘em"!!" One one hand you are talking about an ideal scenario, in which you (or Hitler,etc) are running the show, on the other you are talking about limited power theoretically, which is from a limited scope philosophically. My conclusion: you aren’t serious about *debate*, but you are serious about slandering Nazism because you’re reactive and afraid of it, and want moral revenge.
No. Would I be afraid of a Nazi regime in America? Yes. It’s called survival instincts, fool. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – 7. You fail to show how fascism is a stable form of government. You points out the
… read more »
Response:
Unfortunately for your bullshit argument, the Bene Israel originally had no experience with the Old Testament (‘The Bible’), or the
Talmud, for that matter. Rabbinical Judaism did not exist for the Bene Israel. I am speaking of Judaism, which includes but is not limited to its sects. Your semantic game fails, and you concede this point.
Your generalizations, then, are widely inaccurate, as they pay attention only to the details that you deem worthy – in other words, your willful ignorance of the Bene Israel is manifested not from your allmighty eagle’s eye, but from your predetermined bias. The Bene Israel practice Judaism (albeit it in a simpler form) – A Judaism sans Bible/Talmud. Your description of ‘Judaism’ does not fit the Bene Israel, so instead of accepting them as Jewish, you disregard them. Weak tactic. Once again, I must point out the obvious. Metal arrived from within the ’system’. Au contraire! Metal was the music working against both the system and the "anti-system" – hippiedom – when it evolved. Further, when a
system dominates, anything to counteract will appear to emerge from "within" it but that is semantic error – the system is emerge *in opposition* to it. Metal emerged after Black Sabbath because dark sounds/imagery became ‘cool’ – most other forms of music that become ‘cool’ are known to proliferate and ‘emerge’…_because_ they are cool. You honestly think Ozzy, Motorhead, Venom (etc) played their music not to be ‘cool’, have fun and get wasted, but rather to ‘work against the system and the anti-system’? Give me a break. Delusions of grandeur. I point out historical facts (see above), and you weakly dodge them, and replace academic argument with trite ad hominems. Wow. Where did I dodge them? It seems you mistook a small sect of Judaism
for the whole which is… a deliberate attempt at evasion. Therefore, since you stand against evasion!, you concede this point as well. It seems you’ll blatantly ignore any sect that constitutes a part of the whole and instead deem them unworthy of recognition. Religions are fractured – if you do not identify them by their pieces, you cannot claim to have a view of the ‘whole.’ My point: a ‘comprehensive study’ of Judaism would show that your claims are incorrect in several historical circumstances – enough to warrant a revaluation. — The links list that sent USENET up in arms:
It sent everyone in laughing hysteria. Your true Aryan spirituality is rather impressive…Hitler is God…deep!! ap
Response:
Yes, he uses race as a Judeo-Christian form of external control. How so? I don’t use race as a form of control – Nazis do. ‘Only White people should only participate in White Culture.’ etc. You sure do – you use race to control public opinion with guilt, in the style of the status quo. Incorrect. The only providers of guilt are your ilk, those who spend their time pointing out and identifying ‘race-traitors!1!!!!1′.
Incorrect. Society as a whole uses guilt to control its population, and currently those who are mixing race, denying racism and working against "classical white male-dominated Western society" are the favored ones – through guilt. Face facts: all of your arguments against national socialism have been moral ones based in GUILT and moral polarity. I take it you concede this point as well, since you just fumbled badly. By denying racial characteristics, you are not only enforcing the views of the status quo, but also attempting to use guilt for racial thinking as a control mechanism. I am denying the _importance_ of racial characteristics – their inherent unimportance is necessary to understand.
Someone from the other side would say their inherent importance is necessary to understand; since you are using racial language to try to disprove racism, you are controlling through guilt at the moral outrage of *noticing* race. Further, you haven’t been able to produce clear scientific evidence that race doesn’t exist, nor have the other various flunkies wandering through here. They’ve produced studies which at first glance seem to address the issue, but fail upon analysis. The status quo does not deny racial characteristics – you obviously know nothing of the history of housing in the United States.
You are attempting to hide the current time – the status quo – by focusing on distant history. Currently, the party line of corporation, government, church and other institutions of social control is that race doesn’t exist. Agree or disagree? Black skin devalues property.
This may have nothing to do with racism. I am not pushing for change through guilt (about ‘inequality’,etc), but change through objective analysis of a rotten (and racist) system.
Yet you can’t understand that whether or not this system is broken, another racist system might not be, hence you are using morality against racism – which means you concede the first point brought up in this message. I think the Ainu ought to control their own lands and lives – do you? If the White people can control their own lands and lives. Talk about Judeo-Christian Liberalism… Hypocrisy…yet AGAIN.
Where is there hypocrisy above? If race separatism is encouraged, I support it for all races. That has nothing to do with liberal morality and everything to do with pragmatism. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If my idea = hippy idea, I != hippy. Your weak syllogistic reasoning is laughable. I would like to see Plan 2010 aborted – so would eco- fascists, ‘hippies’, anarchists, socialists, indigenous peoples,etc – because my ideas run concurrent to those of the aforementioned ‘groups’ of people, I cannot be categorized as one, or as any. Let me explain :A hippy would be horrified at the idea of the damming of the Rhine river. Hitler and Hitlerians were also mortified at such plans. Does this hippy = Nazi? No. Hippie = one who believes that by neutralizing differences, a utopia is created, essentially a society based on morality. See also: Judeo-Christian morality updated for the latter half of the 20th century. You fit into this category and have defended it yourself. Thanks for the definition of a hippy, but you failed entirely to address my point. I have not defended Judeo-Christian morality.
You are using morality in your arguments, hence you are defending it. You lost that point, and there’s no way to take it back. Comments? Only a fascist/capitalist would, for example, want me to stop ’selling’ the idea that perhaps, say, the TRW Corporation should be brutally eradicated. Fascism supports the death of TRW. Why do you feel a need to imply otherwise? Impossible. TRW _is_ fascism.
TRW is not fascism; TRW is capitalism, which is morality. Fascism includes ideals TRW finds repugnant: environmentalism, racialism, classless societies and violence over profit. Do you want to assert that TRW is fascism again? You know my answer: you’re building a strawman based on a personal definition of fascism, and are *losing the debate* because you are accusing organizations that share your logic system of being that which you argue against. My ideas aren’t new. But they are far more logical and USEFUL than your outdated Nazi-worship. New? Ha! Western society has been experiencing 2000 years of ongoing Judeo-Christianity, and you are arguing Judeo-Christian morals. My ideas change that. No. Your ideas are moral to the core – see above. Your comment regarding the Ainu betrays you. Your argument is purely moral…
Where are my ideas moral? You did not note any such thing above. My comment regarding the Ainu is simple – I support race separatism, thus I support such a thing. That I’m going to remind you white people need the same is simply a way of showing how hypocritical *your* viewpoint is. Please, this time address my points. The evasiveness has become rather tiresome. I have addressed all your points up till now, and invite you to prove otherwise. 1. Tell me how TRW is not fascistic.
See above; TRW is capitalistic. 2. Tell me why the oppression/genocide of indigenous peoples should stop ‘only if’ the oppression/genocide of Whites is stopped. "Ohh, it’s not fair!1!!!" (As if Whites are the most oppressed/killed people on Earth…as if there even exists such a thing as the ‘White Race’)
Here’s my comment: If the White people can control their own lands and lives.
It’s a conditional. The White races exist, and many have been oppressed and are currently oppressed. Oppression/genocide of indigenous peoples should stop; White races are indigenous peoples also, native to Europe. 3. You fail to prove anything regarding the ‘ugliness’ of ‘racially- mixed’ individuals. 4. You fail to prove anything regarding the ’stupidity’ of ‘racially- mixed’ individuals.
There is no data on the subject either way, since it is taboo to study, but I have pointed to many reasons why the unbalanced nature of racially mixed individuals is evident, and many people throughout history – and social/ethnic trends – which support that idea. You have failed to address my counterarguments, or provide contrary data, hence you concede the point. 5. You fail to show how fascism supports indigenous (non-technological) peoples.
I do not intend to. Fascism (racial separatism + race nationalism) supports each race that implements it. It is your morality talking that wants me to run around the world after indigenous peoples. 6. You fail to show how fascism is independent from capitalism, other than false claims of an anti-corporate Hitler – Hitler relied on international corporations. Because they knew he _needed_ them, they thus had power of him, and thus over the state government of Germany, and thus over the German populace, and thus over German culture (etc).
Incorrect: Hitler spoke repeatedly against capitalism/communism and dissolved German corporations that did not serve him. Further, government moved according to his plan *and public will*, hence he was not autocratic and could not change all things in his government. You have failed to address that argument before, and have failed to pay attention to extensive ideological arguments about why fascism is separate from capitalism. My conclusion: you aren’t serious about *debate*, but you are serious about slandering Nazism because you’re reactive and afraid of it, and want moral revenge. 7. You fail to show how fascism is a stable form of government. You points out the communism/socialism is a historic failure (‘Look at China/Russia!!’), but yet fail to accept that historically, fascism failed miserably, _by its own inner workings_. This last point it key.
Explain how fascism failed by its own inner workings. Thanks. Seems to me fascism has never failed, only been defeated by a much larger foe. You have been trying for two months now and have failed to disprove a single one of my arguments. Do you have something else to say, or are we going to be in a loop of me making arguments and you repeating trivial semantic evasions or insults? You are the one using ad hominems to strengthen your arguments – try again.
You have no examples? I pointed out several ad hominems you were using *in place of* argument. Your argumentative tactics are well-known : "I’ll ignore what you say and give you something else to disprove" . You’re thinking you have achieve victory in a debate rests on the false premise that my inability to "disprove" (render your argument logically incorrect) your argument thus renders your argument correct. (‘proved’) In other words, until you actually PROVE something, I have nothing to disprove. Hence my inability.
I have proved here many ideological connections that you have denied, so now disprove them instead of simply reacting with ad hominem. While your slur-slinging is impressive, you’ve backed down from every major debate so far once it’s become clear that there is no cut and dried evidence for either side. Interpretation scares you. How moral. Are you prepared to concede this debate? I am bored with your lack of intellect, your lack of depth and insight but most of all, your lack of self-respect/honor. — The links list that sent USENET up in arms: http://members.yoderanium.com/jesuscrass/
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Judaism teaches racism and racial supremacy. Wrong. Judaism teaches racial supremacy in the context of anti-racism, based on permanent victim status to the Jews. Big difference. ‘Permanent victim status’ – your ignorance of the Bene Israel does not surprise me, as it reflects your Eurocentric cultural ignorance, as well as your lack of intellectual honesty. My above statement reflects my experience. Your statement fails to reflect an open-minded study of Judeo-Christianity. The diaspora is central to the OLD TESTAMENT and remains central today. Unfortunately for your bullshit argument, the Bene Israel originally had no experience with the Old Testament (‘The Bible’), or the Talmud, for that matter. Rabbinical Judaism did not exist for the Bene Israel.
I am speaking of Judaism, which includes but is not limited to its sects. Your semantic game fails, and you concede this point. I find it hard to think of an argument you could make which would further damage your credibility. You’re a tool of the system, and you and others preach its propaganda – how destructive to metal, to free thought and to the future. Once again, I must point out the obvious. Metal arrived from within the ’system’.
Au contraire! Metal was the music working against both the system and the "anti-system" – hippiedom – when it evolved. Further, when a system dominates, anything to counteract will appear to emerge from "within" it but that is semantic error – the system is emerge *in opposition* to it. I point out historical facts (see above), and you weakly dodge them, and replace academic argument with trite ad hominems. Wow.
Where did I dodge them? It seems you mistook a small sect of Judaism for the whole which is… a deliberate attempt at evasion. Therefore, since you stand against evasion!, you concede this point as well. — The links list that sent USENET up in arms: http://members.yoderanium.com/jesuscrass/
Response:
So blackwizards would be a closet racist ? I think he would love to be called that 
Yes, he uses race as a Judeo-Christian form of external control. How so? I don’t use race as a form of control – Nazis do. ‘Only
White people should only participate in White Culture.’ etc. You sure do – you use race to control public opinion with guilt, in
the style of the status quo. Incorrect. The only providers of guilt are your ilk, those who spend their time pointing out and identifying ‘race-traitors!1!!!!1′. By denying racial characteristics, you are not only enforcing the
views of the status quo, but also attempting to use guilt for racial thinking as a control mechanism. I am denying the _importance_ of racial characteristics – their inherent unimportance is necessary to understand. The status quo does not deny racial characteristics – you obviously know nothing of the history of housing in the United States. Black skin devalues property. I am not pushing for change through guilt (about ‘inequality’,etc), but change through objective analysis of a rotten (and racist) system. I am not asking for people to change the ’system’ in order to prevent guilt from arising — however, this _will_ be _a_ result of a changed system. He is essentially a hippie 30 years later, no new clue to sell. I think the Ainu ought to control their own lands and lives – do you? If the White people can control their own lands and lives.
Talk about Judeo-Christian Liberalism… Hypocrisy…yet AGAIN. If my idea = hippy idea, I != hippy. Your weak syllogistic reasoning is laughable. I would like to see Plan 2010 aborted – so would eco- fascists, ‘hippies’, anarchists, socialists, indigenous
peoples,etc – because my ideas run concurrent to those of the aforementioned ‘groups’ of people, I cannot be categorized as one, or as any. Let me explain :A hippy would be horrified at the idea of the damming of the Rhine river. Hitler and Hitlerians were also mortified at such plans. Does this hippy = Nazi? No. Hippie = one who believes that by neutralizing differences, a utopia
is created, essentially a society based on morality. See also: Judeo-Christian morality updated for the latter half of the 20th century. You fit into this category and have defended it yourself. Thanks for the definition of a hippy, but you failed entirely to address my point. I have not defended Judeo-Christian morality. Only a fascist/capitalist would, for example, want me to stop ’selling’ the idea that perhaps, say, the TRW Corporation should be
brutally eradicated. Fascism supports the death of TRW. Why do you feel a need to imply otherwise?
Impossible. TRW _is_ fascism. My ideas aren’t new. But they are far more logical and USEFUL than your outdated Nazi-worship. New? Ha! Western society has been experiencing 2000 years of ongoing Judeo-Christianity, and you are arguing Judeo-Christian morals. My
ideas change that. No. Your ideas are moral to the core – see above. Your comment regarding the Ainu betrays you. Your argument is purely moral… Please, this time address my points. The evasiveness has become rather tiresome. I have addressed all your points up till now, and invite you to prove otherwise.
1. Tell me how TRW is not fascistic. 2. Tell me why the oppression/genocide of indigenous peoples should stop ‘only if’ the oppression/genocide of Whites is stopped. "Ohh, it’s not fair!1!!!" (As if Whites are the most oppressed/killed people on Earth…as if there even exists such a thing as the ‘White Race’) 3. You fail to prove anything regarding the ‘ugliness’ of ‘racially- mixed’ individuals. 4. You fail to prove anything regarding the ’stupidity’ of ‘racially- mixed’ individuals. 5. You fail to show how fascism supports indigenous (non-technological) peoples. 6. You fail to show how fascism is independent from capitalism, other than false claims of an anti-corporate Hitler – Hitler relied on international corporations. Because they knew he _needed_ them, they thus had power of him, and thus over the state government of Germany, and thus over the German populace, and thus over German culture (etc). 7. You fail to show how fascism is a stable form of government. You points out the communism/socialism is a historic failure (‘Look at China/Russia!!’), but yet fail to accept that historically, fascism failed miserably, _by its own inner workings_. This last point it key. that now you try to hide your tracks with ad hominem. You have been trying for two months now and have failed to disprove a single one of my arguments. Do you have something else to say, or are
we going to be in a loop of me making arguments and you repeating trivial semantic evasions or insults? You are the one using ad hominems to strengthen your arguments – try again. Your argumentative tactics are well-known : "I’ll ignore what you say and give you something else to disprove" . You’re thinking you have achieve victory in a debate rests on the false premise that my inability to "disprove" (render your argument logically incorrect) your argument thus renders your argument correct. (‘proved’) In other words, until you actually PROVE something, I have nothing to disprove. Hence my inability. ap
Response:
Judaism teaches racism and racial supremacy. Wrong. Judaism teaches racial supremacy in the context of anti-racism, based on permanent victim status to the Jews. Big difference. ‘Permanent victim status’ – your ignorance of the Bene Israel does
not surprise me, as it reflects your Eurocentric cultural ignorance, as well as your lack of intellectual honesty. My above statement reflects my experience. Your statement fails to reflect an open-minded study of Judeo-Christianity. The diaspora is central to the OLD TESTAMENT and remains central today.
Unfortunately for your bullshit argument, the Bene Israel originally had no experience with the Old Testament (‘The Bible’), or the Talmud, for that matter. Rabbinical Judaism did not exist for the Bene Israel. I find it hard to think of an argument you could make which would further damage your credibility. You’re a tool of the system, and you and others preach its propaganda – how destructive to metal, to free thought and to the future.
Once again, I must point out the obvious. Metal arrived from within the ’system’. I point out historical facts (see above), and you weakly dodge them, and replace academic argument with trite ad hominems. Wow. ap
Response:
Judaism teaches racism and racial supremacy. Wrong. Judaism teaches racial supremacy in the context of anti-racism, based on permanent victim status to the Jews. Big difference. ‘Permanent victim status’ – your ignorance of the Bene Israel does not surprise me, as it reflects your Eurocentric cultural ignorance, as well as your lack of intellectual honesty. My above statement reflects my experience.
Your statement fails to reflect an open-minded study of Judeo-Christianity. The diaspora is central to the OLD TESTAMENT and remains central today. I find it hard to think of an argument you could make which would further damage your credibility. You’re a tool of the system, and you and others preach its propaganda – how destructive to metal, to free thought and to the future. — The links list that sent USENET up in arms: http://members.yoderanium.com/jesuscrass/
Response:
So blackwizards would be a closet racist ? I think he would love to be called that Yes, he uses race as a Judeo-Christian form of external control. How so? I don’t use race as a form of control – Nazis do. ‘Only White people should only participate in White Culture.’ etc.
You sure do – you use race to control public opinion with guilt, in the style of the status quo. By denying racial characteristics, you are not only enforcing the views of the status quo, but also attempting to use guilt for racial thinking as a control mechanism. You can concede now – that is the only way to continue here with grace. As any first level debate knows, debating the absolute moral negativity of something is also opting to use it as a form of control. He is essentially a hippie 30 years later, no new clue to sell. I think the Ainu ought to control their own lands and lives – do you?
If the White people can control their own lands and lives. If my idea = hippy idea, I != hippy. Your weak syllogistic reasoning is laughable. I would like to see Plan 2010 aborted – so would eco- fascists, ‘hippies’, anarchists, socialists, indigenous peoples,etc – because my ideas run concurrent to those of the aforementioned ‘groups’ of people, I cannot be categorized as one, or as any. Let me explain : A hippy would be horrified at the idea of the damming of the Rhine river. Hitler and Hitlerians were also mortified at such plans. Does this hippy = Nazi? No.
Hippie = one who believes that by neutralizing differences, a utopia is created, essentially a society based on morality. See also: Judeo-Christian morality updated for the latter half of the 20th century. You fit into this category and have defended it yourself. Only a fascist/capitalist would, for example, want me to stop ’selling’ the idea that perhaps, say, the TRW Corporation should be brutally eradicated.
Fascism supports the death of TRW. Why do you feel a need to imply otherwise? My ideas aren’t new. But they are far more logical and USEFUL than your outdated Nazi-worship. New? Ha!
Western society has been experiencing 2000 years of ongoing Judeo-Christianity, and you are arguing Judeo-Christian morals. My ideas change that. Race is a demographic and not moral argument. Incorrect. Race isn’t an argument, it’s a vague classification of homo sapiens.
You fail to understand the word "incorrect": anything can be an argument, and race as an argument is a demographic argument. Any other trivial semantic games you’d like to play? Please, this time address my points. The evasiveness has become rather tiresome.
I have addressed all your points up till now, and invite you to prove otherwise. You’ve failed to do so in the past so it does not surprise me that now you try to hide your tracks with ad hominem. You have been trying for two months now and have failed to disprove a single one of my arguments. Do you have something else to say, or are we going to be in a loop of me making arguments and you repeating trivial semantic evasions or insults? — The links list that sent USENET up in arms: http://members.yoderanium.com/jesuscrass/
Response:
So blackwizards would be a closet racist ? I think he would love to be called that Yes, he uses race as a Judeo-Christian form of external control.
How so? I don’t use race as a form of control – Nazis do. ‘Only White people should only participate in White Culture.’ etc. He is essentially a hippie 30 years later, no new clue to sell.
I think the Ainu ought to control their own lands and lives – do you? If my idea = hippy idea, I != hippy. Your weak syllogistic reasoning is laughable. I would like to see Plan 2010 aborted – so would eco- fascists, ‘hippies’, anarchists, socialists, indigenous peoples,etc – because my ideas run concurrent to those of the aforementioned ‘groups’ of people, I cannot be categorized as one, or as any. Let me explain : A hippy would be horrified at the idea of the damming of the Rhine river. Hitler and Hitlerians were also mortified at such plans. Does this hippy = Nazi? No. Only a fascist/capitalist would, for example, want me to stop ’selling’ the idea that perhaps, say, the TRW Corporation should be brutally eradicated. My ideas aren’t new. But they are far more logical and USEFUL than your outdated Nazi-worship. New? Ha! Race is a demographic and not moral argument.
Incorrect. Race isn’t an argument, it’s a vague classification of homo sapiens. Please, this time address my points. The evasiveness has become rather tiresome. ap
Response:
Judaism teaches racism and racial supremacy. Wrong. Judaism teaches racial supremacy in the context of anti-racism, based
on permanent victim status to the Jews. Big difference.
‘Permanent victim status’ – your ignorance of the Bene Israel does not surprise me, as it reflects your Eurocentric cultural ignorance, as well as your lack of intellectual honesty. My above statement reflects my experience. ap
Response:
Yes, a mistake on my part there. One could hold an opinion that Schoenberg, in the context of classical music is a bad composer, and rationally explain this. I just haven’t seen anyone do it. I have a feeling such an argument would get lost in semantics and definitions.
Not if those arguing were both well-educated and honest. So, instead explain to me how Schoenbergs music could be a Jewish interpretation of nihilism, to get back to the subject at hand.
Nihilism: freedom of tone Schoenberg: "rows" of tone imposing an artificial quantitative order where structuring will do very well; see the difference between Bach and Schoenberg I don’t think Schoenbergs music is good, but that doesn’t mean he was a jew trying to "counter the hope Nietzsche gave to humanity" or something to that effect.
See above. Schoenberg is trying to redefine nihilism as an externalized force, where Nietzsche would reverse that. So blackwizards would be a closet racist ? I think he would love to be called that
Yes, he uses race as a Judeo-Christian form of external control. He is essentially a hippie 30 years later, no new clue to sell. Race is a demographic and not moral argument.
Response:
Judaism teaches racism and racial supremacy.
Wrong. Judaism teaches racial supremacy in the context of anti-racism, based on permanent victim status to the Jews. Big difference. — The links list that sent USENET up in arms: http://members.yoderanium.com/jesuscrass/
Response:
Aha. Makes much more sense 
I would be interested in hearing how Schoenbergs twelve-tone compositions could be Jewish interpretations of nihilism.
Schoenberg’s music is an impotent immitation of Romanticism. The music is totally lifeless, totally futile, and totally boring. What Schoenberg strived to do was to free composers from tonalism, expand the music and move things forward. Doesn’t sound like nihilism to me. But I’m not the greatest fan of Schoenberg myself either.
he tried to overcome the very essence and nature of western music within the context of western music and failed… miserably. He "goes through the motions" but it all seems completely devoid of meaning or purpose. The ‘atonal’ tradition, in order to be effective, always borrows from Eastern music. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I dislike Mahler also, and I dig him. His music is very personal, not the greatest inventor of all time , but Mahlers music is Mahlers music. disgaree that Wagner was the king of anti-Semitism: Chopin, Liszt, Straus, Beethoven and Hayden have all been accused of the same. That you may be correct in; I’m not too familiar with the subject at hand ( Anti-semitism in music history ). I usually just listen to the music, though the history of classical music sure has its load of, shall we say, colourful characters. Hail Anti-Semitism! I wouldn’t know about that. The religion is destructive, but hunting down and killing every jew on the planet is not the correct measure to take here, ALL jews are not alike.
if an individual of Jewish descent has, psychologically speaking, a Jewish identity I would say – neutralize with extreme prejudice. That is one of my big objections against racism, it just paints with a FAR too broad pencil. Anyway, what I find funny about these anti-racists defending Jews, is that they tend to forget that Jews are among the more racist people on earth.
oh no not the whole supremacism v. separatism argument again… It is a sin in Judaism to marry someone who is not a Jew. And don’t forget all the talk about the chosen people.
… you misinterpret racism with racial supremacy. Total Death und ColdVoid uber alles! "The Holocaust never happened, and it should happen again." -Nizkor Project http://www.natvan.com/ http://www.resist.com/ http://www.whiteracist.com/ http://members.yoderanium.com/usa/index2.html/
Response:
oh no not the whole supremacism v. separatism argument again… It is a sin in Judaism to marry someone who is not a Jew. And don’t forget
all the talk about the chosen people. … you misinterpret racism with racial supremacy.
Judaism teaches racism and racial supremacy. ap Before you buy.
Response:
Schoenberg’s music is an impotent immitation of Romanticism. The music is totally lifeless, totally futile, and totally boring. Eh, sure, in your opinion. That doesn’t in anyway answer my question though.
you wouldn’t agree with this interpretation? he tried to overcome the very essence and nature of western music within the context of western music and failed… miserably. In your opinion. He "goes through the motions" but it all seems completely devoid of meaning or purpose. In your opinion again. Your opinion hasn’t got any greater weight in this issue than anyone elses.
I’m speaking very generally here. Most critics agree that Schoenberg was a pathetic composer although he was a clever musical theorist. The ‘atonal’ tradition, in order to be effective, always borrows from Eastern music. In your opinion. And that’s the problem here. You will never be able to objectively explain why Schoenbergs music is bad music.
You’re right, but I sense it is bad music. I cannot explain it rationally though. Others I have read explained why Schoenberg wrote bad music successfully I believe, although I couldn’t point you to any sources. The only reasons you have given here are "feeling" or "opinion" reasons, and feelings and opinions are always subjective.
Opinions aren’t always subjective as long as it is contained within a context. So, instead explain to me how Schoenbergs music could be a Jewish interpretation of nihilism, to get back to the subject at hand. Please ?
I wasn’t suggesting this, jesuscrass was, although I could’ve described Schoenberg like this. As his music is, in essence, an impotent and lifeless perversion of German Romanticism. His music wasn’t unique outside the context of a slight shift in theory. if an individual of Jewish descent has, psychologically speaking, a Jewish identity I would say – neutralize with extreme prejudice. That was what I hinted at. The problem here is that the jews are also a race, so killing of all of Jewish descent is not the right solution.
The psychology of Jewish identity requires a racial component but Jews are definitely not a race in reality. A person of "Jewish descent" is in most cases Ashkenazi, who descend from the Khazaars who were Turks who converted to Judaism. A person of "Jewish descent" is nearly always intermixed with other racial types so they would therefore not constitute a race – other than a race of the mind. oh no not the whole supremacism v. separatism argument again… Fine, fine. You were a separatist, right ? … you misinterpret racism with racial supremacy. So racism = separatism, not racism = supremacy ? Anyway, my point still stands. I find anti-racists/anti-supremacists who defend jews absolutely ridiculous.
agreed. To clarify: Racism is simply the belief that racial differences in genetics exist and that these distinctions are important. Usually racists fall into two camps: supremacists and separatists. The other type of racist is the closet racist who believes that racism (as I defined it) is in fact true but that racial distinctions should be eliminated in favor of egalatarianism. Total Death und ColdVoid uber alles! "The Holocaust never happened, and it should happen again." -Nizkor Project http://www.natvan.com/ http://www.resist.com/ http://www.whiteracist.com/ http://members.yoderanium.com/usa/index2.html/
Response:
Categories: Asthma Rate | 
No Comments »
